Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Communications

The European Journal of Communication Research

Ed. by Averbeck-Lietz, Stefanie / d'Haenens, Leen

4 Issues per year


IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.744
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 1.147

CiteScore 2017: 1.49

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.703
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.736

Online
ISSN
1613-4087
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Ahead of print

Issues

Why do we click? Investigating reasons for user selection on a news aggregator website

Sabrina Heike Kessler
  • Corresponding author
  • IKMZ – Department of Communication and Media Research University of Zurich Zürich Switzerland
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Ines Engelmann
Published Online: 2018-07-25 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2018-2003

Abstract

The aim of this study is to analyze the reasons behind users’ selection of news results on the news aggregator website, Google News, and the role that news factors play in this selection. We assume that user’s cognitive elaboration of users influences their news selection. In this study, a multi-method approach is used to obtain a complete picture of the users’ news selection reasoning: an open survey, a closed survey, and a content analysis of screen recording data. The results were determined from online news selection of 90 news results from 47 users on Google News. Different news values could be identified as relevant for selection: time-referenced news factors and news factors of social significance were shown to be more important than the news factors of deviance. News cues (presence of a picture, position of a news result, source) were identified as selection reasons regardless of the level of cognitive elaboration during the online browsing process.

Keywords: online selection reasons; news aggregator website; news selection; news factors; news values

References

  • Alwin, D. F. (2010). How good is survey measurement? Assessing the reliability and validity of survey measures. In P. V. Marsden & J. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (2nd ed., pp. 405–434). London: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar

  • Bates, M. J. (2002). Toward an integrated model of information seeking and searching. New Review of Information Behaviour Research, 3, 1–15.Google Scholar

  • Bless, H., Fellhauer, R. F., Bohner, G., & Schwarz, N. (1991). Need for cognition: Eine Skala zur Erfassung von Engagement und Freude bei Denkaufgaben [Need for cognition: A scale measuring dedication and joy when doing brainteasers]. ZUMA-Arbeitsbericht, 91(6), 1–12.Google Scholar

  • Bucher, H.-J., & Schumacher, P. (2006). The relevance of attention for selecting news content. An eye-tracking study on attention patterns in the reception of print and online media. Communications: European Journal of Communications Research, 31(3), 347–368. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2006.022Google Scholar

  • Carlson, M. (2007). Order versus access: News search engines and the challenge to traditional journalistic roles. Media, Culture, and Society, 29(1), 1014–1030. doi:10.1177/0163443707084346Google Scholar

  • Donsbach, W. (1991). Medienwirkung trotz Selektion: Einflussfaktoren auf die Zuwendung zu Zeitungsinhalten [Media impact despite selection: Influencing factors on the attention for newspaper content]. Cologne: Böhlau.Google Scholar

  • Donsbach, W. (2004). Psychology of news decisions. Factors behind journalists’ professional behavior. Journalism, 5(2), 131–157. doi:10.1177/146488490452002Google Scholar

  • Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar

  • Eilders, C. (2006). News factors and news decisions: Theoretical and methodological advances in Germany. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research, 31(1), 5–24. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2006.002Google Scholar

  • Galtung, J., & Ruge, M. (1965). The structure of foreign news. Journal of Peace Research, 2(1), 64–91.Google Scholar

  • Granka, L., Feusner, M., & Lorigo, L. (2008). Eyetracking in online search. In Hammoud, R. I. (Ed.), Passive eye monitoring (pp. 283–304). New York: Springer.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Google (2016). About Google News. Retrieved May 5, 2017, from http://www.google.com/intl/en_us/about_google_news.html.Google Scholar

  • Hautzer, L., Lünich, M., & Rössler, P. (2012). Social Navigation. Neue Orientierungsmuster bei der Mediennutzung im Internet [Social navigation. New orientation patterns for the media use on the internet]. Baden-Baden: Nomos.Google Scholar

  • Hogg, T., & Lerman, K. (2015). Disentangling the effects of social signals. Human Computation, 2(2), 189–208. doi:10.15346/hc.v2i2.4Google Scholar

  • Kepplinger, H. M., & Ehmig, S. (2006). Predicting news decisions. An empirical test of the two-component theory of news selection. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research, 31(1), 25–43. doi:10.1515/COMMUN.2006.003Google Scholar

  • Kessler, S. H. & Zillich, A. F. (2018). Searching online for information about vaccination: Assessing the influence of user-specific cognitive factors using eye-tracking. Health Communication, online first. doi:10.1080/10410236.2018.1465793Google Scholar

  • Kim, J. (2009). Describing and predicting information-seeking behavior on the web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(4), 679–693. doi:10.1002/asi.21035Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Lee, G. (2006). Agenda setting effects in the digital age: Uses and effects of online media. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar

  • Lee, J. H. (2009). News values, media coverage, and audience attention: An analysis of direct and mediated causal relationships. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(1), 175–190. doi:10.1177/107769900908600111Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Lerman, K., & Hogg, T. (2014). Leveraging position bias to improve peer recommendation. PLoS ONE, 9(6), e98914.Google Scholar

  • Lorigo, L., Haridasan, M., Brynjarsdottir, H., Xia, L., Joachims, T., Gay, G., Granka, L., Pellacini, F., & Pan, B. (2008). Eye tracking and online search: Lessons learned and challenges ahead. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(7), 1041–1052. doi:10.1002/asi.20794Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Newman, N., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K. (2015). Reuters institute digital news report. Tracking the future of news. Retrieved March 8, 2018 from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Reuters%20Institute%20Digital%20News%20Report%202015_Full%20Report.pdf.Google Scholar

  • Papacharissi, Z., & de Fatima Oliveira, M. (2012). Affective news and networked publics: The rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 266–282. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01630.xWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

  • Phillips, W. J., Fletcher, J. M., Marks, A. D. G., & Hine, D. W. (2016). Thinking styles and decision making: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(3), 260–290. doi:10.1037/bul0000027Google Scholar

  • Prior, M. (2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20(2), 149–171.Google Scholar

  • Roberts, C. (2010). Correlations among variables in message and messenger credibility scales. American Behavioral Scientist, 54(1), 43–56. doi:10.1177/0002764210376310Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Schlink, S., & Walther, E. (2007). Kurz und gut: Eine deutsche Kurzskala zur Erfassung des Bedürfnisses nach kognitiver Geschlossenheit [Short and sweet: A German short scale to measure need for cognitive closure]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 38(3), 153–161. doi:10.1024/0044-3514.38.3.153Google Scholar

  • Schmid-Petri, H., Häussler, T., & Adam, S. (2016). Different actors, different factors? A comparison of the news factor orientation between newspaper journalists and civil-society actors. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research, 41(4), 399–419. doi:10.1515/commun-2016-0023Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Schwarz, N., & Oyserman, D. (2001). Asking questions about behavior: Cognition, communication and questionnaire construction. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 127–160. doi:abs/10.1177/109821400102200202Google Scholar

  • Segev, E. (2010). Google and the digital divide: The bias of online knowledge. Oxford, GB: Elsevier.Google Scholar

  • Seibold, B. (2002). Klick-Magnete. Welche Faktoren bei Online-Nachrichten Aufmerksamkeit erzeugen, [Click magnets: Factors explaining attention to news items on online news sites]. Munich: Fischer.Google Scholar

  • Shoemaker, P. J., & Cohen A. A. (2006). News around the world. Content, practitioners, and the public. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Sundar, S. S. (2008). The MAIN Model: A heuristic approach to understanding technology effects on credibility. In M. J. Metzger & A. J. Flanagin (Eds.), Digital media, youth, and credibility (pp. 73–100). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. doi:10.1162/dmal.9780262562324.073Google Scholar

  • Sundar, S. S., Jia, H., Waddell, T. F., & Huang, Y. (2015). Toward a theory of interactive media effects (TIME). Four models for explaining how interface features affect user psychology. In S. S. Sundar (Ed.), The handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 47–86). Malden, MA: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar

  • Sundar, S. S., Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Hastall M. R. (2007). News cues: Information scent and cognitive heuristics. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(3), 366–378. doi:10.1002/asi.20511Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Tourangeau, R., & Bradburn, N. M. (2010). The psychology of survey response. In P. V. Marsden & J. D. Wright (eds.), Handbook of survey research (2nd ed., pp. 315–346). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar

  • Tremel, A. (2010). Suchen, finden – glauben? Die Rolle der Glaubwürdigkeit von Suchergebnissen bei der Nutzung von Suchmaschinen [Search, find – believe? The role of the credibility of search results when using search engines]. Doctoral dissertation, LMU, Munich.Google Scholar

  • Waal, E., & Schönbach, K. (2008). Presentation style and beyond: How print newspapers and online news expand awareness of public affairs issues. Mass Communication and Society, 11(2), 161–176.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Weber, P. (2014). Discussions in the comments section: Factors influencing participation and interactivity in online newspapers’ reader comments. New Media and Society, 16(6), 941–957. doi:10.1177/1461444813495165Google Scholar

  • Wendelin, M., Engelmann, I., & Neubarth, J. (2017). User rankings and the journalistic news selection. Comparing news values and topics. Journalism Studies, 18(2), 135–153. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2015.1040892Google Scholar

  • Xu, Q. (2013). Social recommendation, source credibility, and recency: Effects of news cues in a social bookmarking website. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(4), 757–775. doi:10.1177/1077699013503158Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Ziegele, M., Breiner, T., & Quiring, O. (2014). What creates interactivity in online news discussions? An exploratory analysis of discussion factors in user comments on news items. Journal of Communication, 64(6), 1111–1138. doi:10.1111/jcom.12123Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-07-25


Citation Information: Communications, ISSN (Online) 1613-4087, ISSN (Print) 0341-2059, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2018-2003.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in