Do You Believe in Polls After All? An Experimental Study on Credibility in Political Opinion Polls

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Bibliographische Infos

Cover der Ausgabe: M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft Jahrgang 73 (2025), Heft 4
Open Access Vollzugriff

M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft

Jahrgang 73 (2025), Heft 4

Autor:innen:
Verlag
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyrightjahr
2025
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
ISSN-Print
1615-634X

Kapitelinformationen

Open Access Vollzugriff

Jahrgang 73 (2025), Heft 4

Do You Believe in Polls After All? An Experimental Study on Credibility in Political Opinion Polls

Autor:innen:
ISSN-Print
1615-634X
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
Kapitelvorschau:

Literaturverzeichnis

  1. Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2007). Agency and communion from the perspective of self versus others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(5), 751–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.751 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  2. Abele, A. E., & Wojciszke, B. (2013). The Big Two in social judgment and behavior. Social Psychology, 44(2), 61–62. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000137 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  3. Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. S. (2016). Measuring message credibility: Construction and validation of an exclusive scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 93(1), 59–79. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015606057 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  4. Behr, D., Braun, M., & Dorer, B. (2015). Messinstrumente in internationalen Studien (GESIS Survey Guidelines). https://www.gesis.org/fileadmin/admin/Dateikatalog/pdf/guidelines/messinstrumente_internationale_studien_behr_braun_dorer_2015.pdf [12.11.2025]. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  5. Bhatti, Y., & Pedersen, R. T. (2016). News reporting of opinion polls: Journalism and statistical noise. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 28(1), 129–141. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  6. Cuddy, A. J., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2008). Warmth and competence as universal dimensions of social perception: The stereotype content model and the BIAS map. Advances in experimental social psychology, 40, 61–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  7. Christofoletti, R. (2024). Trust in media and journalism credibility in the sea of misinformation. The International Review of Information Ethics, 33(1). Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  8. Curry, A. L., & Stroud, N. J. (2021). The effects of journalistic transparency on credibility assessments and engagement intentions. Journalism, 22(4), 901–918. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918807591 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  9. Denner, N., Brocke, J., & Joeckel, S. (2016). Same result, different effect: The credibility attribution to public opinion research results. SCM Studies in Communication and Media, 5(2), 173–196. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  10. Fawzi, N., & Krämer, B. (2021). The media as part of a detached elite? Exploring antimedia populism among citizens and its relation to political populism. International Journal of Communication, 15(2021), 3292–3314. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  11. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  12. Fiske, S. T. (2018). Stereotype Content: Warmth and Competence Endure. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(2), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417738825 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  13. Gadringer, S., Holzinger, R., Nening, I., Sparvier, S., & Trappel, J. (2019). Digital News Report Network Austria. Detailergebnisse für Österreich. Universität Salzburg. https://digitalnewsreport.at/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/DNR_2019.pdf [12.11.2025]. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  14. Gadringer, S., Sparviero, S., Trappel, J., & Reichenberger, P. (2023). Digital News Report Network Austria: Detailergebnisse für Österreich. Universität Salzburg. https://zenodo.org/records/8008752 [12.11.2025]. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  15. Hanitzsch, T., & Vos, T. P. (2018). Journalism beyond democracy: A new look into journalistic roles in political and everyday life. Journalism, 19(2), 146–164. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917725163 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  16. Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Press. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  17. Hellmueller, L., & Trilling, D. (2012). The credibility of credibility measures: a meta-analysis in leading communication journals, 1951 to 2011. WAPOR Hong Kong 2012: paper presentation. World Association for Public Opinion Research/Public Opinion Programme, The University of Hong Kong. http://wapor2012.hkpop.hk/doc/papers/ConcurrentSessionsV/VD/VD-3.pdf [12.11.2025]. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  18. Jackob, N., & Hueß, C. (2016). Communication and persuasion. In M. Potthoff (Ed.), Schlüsselwerke der Medienwirkungsforschung (pp. 49–60). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  19. Kalogeropoulos, A., Suiter, J., Udris, L., & Eisenegger, M. (2019). News media trust and news consumption: Factors related to trust in news in 35 countries. International Journal of Communication, 13(22). Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  20. Kervyn, N., Bergsieker, H., & Fiske, S. (2012a). The innuendo effect: Hearing the positive but inferring the negative. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48(1), 77–85. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  21. Kervyn, N., Fiske, S. T., & Malone, C. (2012b). Brands as intentional agents framework: How perceived intentions and ability can map brand perception. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2011.09.006 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  22. Kim, T., & Ball, J. G. (2021). Unintended consequences of warmth appeals: An extension of the compensation effect between warmth and competence to advertising. Journal of Advertising, 50(5), 622–638. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  23. Krause, W., & Gahn, C. (2023). Should we include margins of error in public opinion polls? European Journal of Political Research, 160(3), 1–23. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  24. Kuru, O., Pasek, J., & Traugott, M. W. (2017). Motivated reasoning in the perceived credibility of public opinion polls. Public Opinion Quarterly, 81(2), 422–446. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfx009 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  25. Kuru, O., Pasek, J., & Traugott, M. W. (2020). When polls disagree: How competitive results and methodological quality shape partisan perceptions of polls and electoral predictions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 32(3), 586–603. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edaa017 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  26. Laustsen, L., & Bor, A. (2017). The relative weight of character traits in political candidate evaluations: Warmth is more important than competence, leadership and integrity. Electoral Studies, 49(4), 96–107. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  27. Madson, G. J., & Hillygus, D. S. (2020). All the Best Polls Agree with Me: Bias in Evaluations of Political Polling. Political Behavior, 42(4), 1055–1072. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09532-1 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  28. Mavridis, C., & Ortuño-Ortín, I. (2018). Polling in a proportional representation system. Social Choice and Welfare, 51(2), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-018-1177-1 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  29. McAllister, I. (2016). Candidates and voting choice. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228637.013.38 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  30. Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D. R., & McCann, R. M. (2003). Credibility for the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. In P. J. Kalbfleisch (Ed.), Communication yearbook 27 (pp. 293–335). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  31. Moy, P., & Rinke, E. M. (2012). Attitudinal and behavioral consequences of published opinion polls. In C. Holtz-Bacha & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Opinion polls and the media: Reflecting and shaping public opinion (pp. 225–245). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  32. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Eddy, K., Robertson, C. T., & Nielsen, R. K. (2023). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2023. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-06/Digital_News_Report_2023.pdf [12.11.2025]. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  33. Oleskog Tryggvason, P. (2020). How mediated opinion polls influence political parties: Revisiting the arena framework. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 32(2), 243–265. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edz036 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  34. Oleskog Tryggvason, P., & Strömbäck, J. (2018). Fact or fiction? Journalism Studies, 19(14), 2148–2167. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  35. Peter, C., & Ponzi, M. (2018). The risk of omitting warmth or competence information in ads: Advertising strategies for hedonic and utilitarian brand types. Journal of Advertising Research, 58(4), 423–432. https://doi.org/10.2501/JAR-2018-044 Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  36. Seethaler, J. (2024). Austria: Losing long-term media market stability. In A. K. Schapals & C. Pentzold (Eds.), Media compass: A companion to international media landscapes (pp. 8-17). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Blackwell. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  37. Stadtmüller, S., Silber, H., & Beuthner, C. (2022). What influences trust in survey results? Evidence from a vignette experiment. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 34(2), 229. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  38. Self, C. C. (1996). Credibility. In M. B. Salwen & D. W. Stacks (Eds.), An integrated approach to communication theory and research (pp. 421–441). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  39. Stocké, V. (2003). Einstellungen zu Umfragen. Zusammenstellung sozialwissenschaftlicher Items und Skalen (ZIS). https://doi.org/10.6102/zis218. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  40. Strömbäck, J. (2012). The media and their use of opinion polls: Reflecting and shaping public opinion. In C. Holtz-Bacha & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Opinion Polls and the Media: Reflecting and Shaping Public Opinion (pp. 1–22). Palgrave Macmillan UK. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  41. Tsfati, Y. (2001). Why do people trust media pre-election polls? Evidence from the Israeli 1996 elections. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 13(4), 433–441. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567
  42. Wojciszke, B. (1994). Multiple meanings of behavior: Construing actions in terms of competence or morality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(2), 222–232. Google Scholar öffnen DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2025-4-567

Zitation

Download RIS Download BibTex

Downloads

Download Kapitel (PDF) Download kompl. Werk (PDF)

Hinweis

Dieses Werk ist urheberrechtlich geschützt und darf nur nach den Vorgaben der Nutzungs- und Lizenzvereinbarung genutzt werden. Jede darüber hinaus gehende Nutzung des Werkes ist ausdrücklich untersagt und wird verfolgt.

Per E-Mail teilen

Medien