|
Article Excerpt
The early years of the twenty-first century are likely to be remembered, at least in news media circles, for a staggering decline in traditional news media use and a correlating growth in Web news consumption (Project for Excellence in Journalism, 2005). Despite this apparent transition in where people get news information, a growing body of survey findings shows that Web use is not randomly distributed across demographic groups (Dutton, Gillett, McKnight, & Peltu, 2003; Norris, 2001). In terms of socioeconomic status, Web users are at the middle to high end, and according to knowledge gap literature, this is the group that acquires mediated information more efficiently than those members of society who inhabit lower socioeconomic strata (see Gaziano, 1997; Viswanath & Finnegan, 1996). The pressing question is how these changing patterns in news channel use might influence knowledge gaps, informed citizenship, and ultimately democracy. This study tests knowledge gap formation at the intersection of media channels and education groups by focusing on individual-level information processing dimensions. After more than 100 survey studies, the knowledge gap hypothesis has entered a phase of experimental investigation. The goal here is to advance experimental work on the knowledge gap, testing cognition as one potential micro-level explanation for a macro-level phenomenon.
Knowledge Gain: Education and Channel
The Limited Capacity Model of Mediated Message Processing (LC3MP) provides a micro perspective on the process whereby participants encode (measured through recognition memory), store (measured through cued recall), and retrieve information (measured through free recall). This model parses out cognitive processes along three dimensions without treating it as a linear procedure. For example, encoded information might not be stored at all, or already stored information might be used to support the encoding process (Lang, 2000). Moreover, the three sub-processes often compete for a limited pool of cognitive resources. In a state of cognitive overload, one or more process will suffer at the expense of the other. But it could also happen that the cognitive system is under-engaged by stimuli--leading to poor processing overall, or during individual sub-processes. In this sense, testing how well participants perform for each sub-process gives a comprehensive account of knowledge gain. A news story might be remembered, but details about it or the main point of importance might not be remembered.
Knowledge gap researchers commonly employ education level of participants as an indicator of socioeconomic status. Likewise, Grabe, Lang, Zhou and Bolls (2000) provided experimental evidence that adults with a high school (or less) education encode news information less efficiently than those with college degrees. This study offered results related to television news only and did not test for the storage or retrieval dimensions of memory. Other knowledge gap literature suggests that education level might also impact storage and retrieval processes. In fact, Park and Kosicki (1995) argue that educated media users may remember more information than less educated ones because their thought processes and ability to make connections between related pieces of information are more elaborated. This connectedness between chunks of information increases the amounts of information stored (Craik & Lockhart, 1972; Jerit, Barabas, & Bolsen, 2006). Similarly, Chew and Palmer (1994) and Rogers (1976) argue that less educated people may have less developed cognitive abilities to select, store, and retrieve information, suggesting they may gain less knowledge than higher educated people when exposed to the same information. It is possible that the educational processes that develop reading and writing skills enhance the ability to process visual and aural information (Park & Kosicki, 1995). These research findings inform the first hypothesis:
[H.sub.1]: People with higher levels of education will outperform those with lower levels of education in terms of encoding, storage, and retrieval of news information.
This study is also concerned with the varying potential of media channels to advance knowledge gain. Viewed comprehensively, channel--or news source studies as they are sometimes called--are inconclusive about the efficiency of different news channels in advancing an informed citizenry (e.g., Gunter, 1987; Stauffer, Frost, & Rybolt, 1987). Contradictory findings can perhaps be explained as a function of inconsistent memory/knowledge measures, varying ecological validity of experimental stimuli, differences in the data collection environment, and micro versus macro levels of analysis using experiments and survey methodologies. The participant pools also vary across experimental studies from undergraduate students to adults.
News channel research gained momentum when survey studies revealed that media consumers did not learn much from news, particularly television and radio news (Neuman, 1976; Wilson, 1994). At least two separate studies found that a few minutes after a newscast about 50% of randomly selected survey participants could not recall a single news story (Neuman, 1976; Nordenstreng, 1972). Another series of survey studies linked people who cite television news as their primary source of news to lower levels of knowledge than those who rely on print media (Becket & Whitney, 1981; Robinson, 1974). Consequently, two popular explanations for television's inadequacy to enlighten citizens emerged: (1) the videocentric nature of the medium inhibits thorough processing (McClure & Patterson, 1976; Singer, 1980); and (2) viewers pay less attention to television than print media during exposure (Chaiken & Eagly, 1976; Levy, 1978). At the same time, experimental work on news channel comparisons ensued. The studies by Gunter and associates were particularly emphatic in pegging television as the lesser channel for conveying information to citizens (Gunter, 1987; Gunter, Furnham & Gietson, 1994).
DeFleur, Davenport, Cronin, and DeFleur (1992), and Facorro and DeFleur (1993) added the computer screen to the repertoire of news channels and found it to be almost as effective for learning as the printed word, with television (and radio) the least effective. In channel comparisons across print and online news (Eveland & Dunwoody, 2002) and then print, television, and online news (Eveland, Seo, & Matron, 2002), print news was identified as more memorable than online and television news. Although research on information processing of Web news is limited, it suggests superiority over television in memory tests (see Dalrymple & Scheufele, 2007).
A number of studies have offered evidence that television news could be as good as or better than newspapers in conveying memorable information (Neuman, Just, & Crigler, 1992; van der Molen & van der Voort, 2000; Wicks, 1995). This idea also has prominence in survey research on knowledge gain during political election campaigns (Chaffee, Zhao, & Leshner, 1994; Holbert, Benoit, Hansen, & Wen, 2003; Weaver & Drew, 2001). Yet, the majority of research suggests otherwise, and forms the basis for the second hypothesis:
[H.sub.2]: In terms of encoding, storage, and retrieval of news information, print versions will be remembered best, followed by Web, and then television versions of stories.
Audience Motivation and Knowledge Gain
In knowledge gap research, motivation to attend to messages features prominently as an individual-level explanation for information gain differences among education groups (Gaziano, 1997; Viswanath & Finnegan, 1996). It has been tested using variables such as viewer interest, involvement, concern, and perceived message clarity and importance (Chew & Palmer, 1994; Ettema, Brown, & Luepker, 1983; Ettema & Kline, 1977; Fredin, Monnett, & Kosicki, 1994; Kwak, 1999; McLeod & Perse, 1994). Ettema and colleagues (1977, 1983) conclude that knowledge gaps exist in part because of differing levels of interest in and use for information. They question information processing explanations for the knowledge gap by arguing that public affairs news does not require highly developed processing abilities-it is merely more important to people in higher socioeconomic groups, leading to knowledge gaps. This argument competes with the strand of knowledge gap research that explains the cleavage in terms of cognitive differences, as discussed in the lead-up to Hypothesis 1. Kwak (1999) reports that respondents' level of interest in following a presidential campaign did not explain the knowledge gap, but that behavioral involvement with the campaign (e.g., monetary contribution, wearing campaign buttons, attending a rally) did. Based on that study and developmental research that demonstrated formal education improves information processing competencies (Morrison, Smith, & Dow-Ehrensberger, 1995; Sharp, Cole, & Lave, 1978), the following hypothesis is posed:
[H.sub.3]: Knowledge gaps, measured in terms of encoding, storage, and retrieval of news information, exist independent of motivational evaluations of news such as perceived understandability, informativeness, and interest in the stories.
Encoding is arguably less affected by evaluative motivational factors such as perceived understandability, interest, and informativeness of the...
|
