Manipulated vs. Measured: Using an Experimental Benchmark to Investigate the Performance of Self-Reported Media Exposure

Jennifer Jerit*, Jason Barabas, William Pollock, Susan Banducci, Daniel Stevens, Martijn Schoonvelde

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Media exposure is one of the most important concepts in the social sciences, and yet scholars have struggled with how to operationalize it for decades. Some researchers have focused on the effects of variously worded self-report measures. Others advocate the use of aggregate and/or behavioral data that does not rely on a person’s ability to accurately recall exposure. Our study illustrates how an experimental design can be used to improve measures of exposure. In particular, we show how an experimental benchmark can be employed to (1) compare actual (i.e., manipulated) and self-reported values of news exposure; (2) assess how closely the self-reported items approximate the performance of “true” exposure in an empirical application; and (3) investigate whether a variation in question wording improves the accuracy of self-reported exposure measures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)99-114
Number of pages16
JournalCommunication Methods and Measures
Volume10
Issue number2-3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Apr 2016

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 Taylor & Francis.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Manipulated vs. Measured: Using an Experimental Benchmark to Investigate the Performance of Self-Reported Media Exposure'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this