This article studies the efficiency of different samples for content analysis of news in media effects studies by comparing the agenda-setting effect of a classic sample with the effect of a sample drawn based on audiences’ self-reported media habits. Contrary to the belief that exposure to sampled media content is necessary for observation of media effects, samples drawn based on overall readership/viewership of the media are more efficient than samples based on audiences’ actual consumption habits. A traditional media sample yields a stronger agenda-setting effect compared to a sample drawn based on self-reported media habits. But correlations between the two media samples are also strong. The findings suggest that a broad intermedia agenda-setting process makes it possible for researchers to draw a traditional sample that is representative of the issues salient to audiences regardless of their level of exposure to the sampled media. In other words, even in a demassified media environment, traditional samples are still the best option for media effects researchers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milad Minooie (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: