Selective Exposure in a Presidential Campaign Contingent on Certainty and Salience

Rather than concluding that “no general psychological preference for supportive information exists,” as Sears and Freedman (1967) do, this paper asserts that their review addresses a misstated research question. The primary issue is not whether such a preference always occurs, but under what conditions selective exposure occurs. Selective exposure is redefined without a defensive avoidance assumption, so it is called supportive selection. Supportive information is assumed to require less cognitive concentration and effort than the counterarguing required for nonsupportive information. The redefined supportive selection also emphasizes the social context of the individual. The long-term social conditions also affect supportive selection. The analysis concentrates on testing the contingent conditions of certainty and salience. The most consistent results are found for a presidential preference by certainty interaction. Depending upon which candidate voters support, the more certain they are, the more likely voters are to select supportive information. Problems that remain persistently insoluble should always be suspected as questions asked in the wrong way.—Alan Watts