Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T20:01:49.611Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cognitive Biases and Communication Strength in Social Networks: The Case of Episodic Frames

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 October 2018

Lene Aarøe
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Aarhus University
Michael Bang Petersen*
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, Aarhus University Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus University
*
*Corresponding author. Email: michael@ps.au.dk
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Media stories often reach citizens via a two-step process, transmitted to them indirectly via their social networks. Why are some media stories strongly transmitted and impact opinions powerfully in this two-step flow while others quickly perish? Integrating classical research on the two-step flow of political communication and novel theories from cognitive psychology, this article outlines a model for understanding the strength of political frames in the two-step flow. It argues that frames that resonate with cognitive biases (that is, deep-seated psychological decision rules) will be transmitted more and have a stronger influence on opinion when citizens recollect media frames in their social networks. Focusing on the case of episodic and thematic frames, the study tests this model. It introduces a novel research design: implementing the children’s game ‘Telephone’ in consecutive experimental online surveys fielded to nationally representative samples. This design helps gauge the reliability of transmission and the degree of persuasiveness in actual chains of transmission.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2018
Figure 0

Figure 1. Transmitted information from the original episodic and thematic frames. Note: entries are mean proportions of transmitted information with 95 per cent confidence intervals. The findings were estimated using paired samples t-tests. In Panel A, n=1,515. In Panel B, n=512 in transmission 1, n=485 in transmission 2, and n=518 in transmission 3.

Figure 1

Table 1. The effect of received episodic information on the impact of the issue frame on opinion

Figure 2

Figure 2. Effect of receiving the pro compared to the con issue frame on support for the proposal by transmission and amount of received episodic and thematic information .Note: the effect of the pro relative to the con issue frame on support for the policy proposal is illustrated for a case in which the amount of information from the episodic frame (Panel A) and the thematic frame (Panel B) is kept at a value of 0.25 (high amount) and the amount of information of the other type is kept at 0.08 (low amount) in transmissions 2–3. The 80th percentile on a variable averaging across the amount of received information from the episodic and thematic frames across transmissions 2–3 is 0.25, 0.08 is the 20th percentile. The effects are illustrated using Models 2–3 in Table 1 and illustrated with 95 per cent confidence intervals. Note that the confidence intervals are relatively wide. This reflects the low number of cases above the 80th percentile for one information type and below the 20th percentile for the other information type.

Figure 3

Table 2. Effect of sender’s education on the amount of transmitted information

Figure 4

Table 3. Effect of sender’s education on the impact of received episodic information on the impact of the issue frame on opinion

Supplementary material: Link

Aarøe and Petersen Dataset

Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Aarøe and Petersen supplementary material

Online Appendix

Download Aarøe and Petersen supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 576.1 KB