School of Communication

Permanent URI for this community

https://hdl.handle.net/10919/24248

Browse

Browsing School of Communication by Subject "Communication"

Now showing 1 - 4 of 4
  • Thumbnail Image
    An Agenda for Open Science in Communication
    Dienlin, Tobias; Johannes, Niklas; Bowman, Nicholas David; Masur, Philipp K.; Engesser, Sven; Kümpel, Anna Sophie; Lukito, Josephine; Bier, Lindsey M.; Zhang, Renwen; Johnson, Benjamin K.; Huskey, Richard; Schneider, Frank M.; Breuer, Johannes; Parry, Douglas A.; Vermeulen, Ivar; Fisher, Jacob T.; Banks, Jaime; Weber, René; Ellis, David A.; Smits, Tim; Ivory, James Dee; Trepte, Sabine; McEwan, Bree; Rinke, Eike Mark; Neubaum, German; Winter, Stephan; Carpenter, Christopher J.; Krämer, Nicole; Utz, Sonja; Unkel, Julian; Wang, Xiaohui; Davidson, Brittany I.; Kim, Nuri; Won, Andrea Stevenson; Domahidi, Emese; Lewis, Neil A.; de Vreese, Claes (2021-02)
    In the last 10 years, many canonical findings in the social sciences appear unreliable. This so-called "replication crisis" has spurred calls for open science practices, which aim to increase the reproducibility, replicability, and generalizability of findings. Communication research is subject to many of the same challenges that have caused low replicability in other fields. As a result, we propose an agenda for adopting open science practices in Communication, which includes the following seven suggestions: (1) publish materials, data, and code; (2) preregister studies and submit registered reports; (3) conduct replications; (4) collaborate; (5) foster open science skills; (6) implement Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines; and (7) incentivize open science practices. Although in our agenda we focus mostly on quantitative research, we also reflect on open science practices relevant to qualitative research. We conclude by discussing potential objections and concerns associated with open science practices.
  • Thumbnail Image
    An Agenda for Open Science in Communication
    Dienlin, Tobias; Johannes, Niklas; Bowman, Nicholas David; Masur, Philipp K.; Engesser, Sven; Kümpel, Anna Sophie; Lukito, Josephine; Bier, Lindsey M.; Zhang, Renwen; Johnson, Benjamin K.; Huskey, Richard; Schneider, Frank M.; Breuer, Johannes; Parry, Douglas A.; Vermeulen, Ivar; Fisher, Jacob T.; Banks, Jaime; Weber, René; Ellis, David A.; Smits, Tim; Ivory, James Dee; Trepte, Sabine; McEwan, Bree; Rinke, Eike Mark; Neubaum, German; Winter, Stephan; Carpenter, Christopher J.; Krämer, Nicole; Utz, Sonja; Unkel, Julian; Wang, Xiaohui; Davidson, Brittany I.; Kim, Nuri; Won, Andrea Stevenson; Domahidi, Emese; Lewis, Neil A.; de Vreese, Claes (Oxford University Press, 2020)
    In the last 10 years, many canonical findings in the social sciences appear unreliable. This so-called “replication crisis” has spurred calls for open science practices, which aim to increase the reproducibility, replicability, and generalizability of findings. Communication research is subject to many of the same challenges that have caused low replicability in other fields. As a result, we propose an agenda for adopting open science practices in Communication, which includes the following seven suggestions: (1) publish materials, data, and code; (2) preregister studies and submit registered reports; (3) conduct replications; (4) collaborate; (5) foster open science skills; (6) implement Transparency and Openness Promotion Guidelines; and (7) incentivize open science practices. Although in our agenda we focus mostly on quantitative research, we also reflect on open science practices relevant to qualitative research. We conclude by discussing potential objections and concerns associated with open science practices.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Same Scandal, Different Standards: The Effect of Partisanship on Expectations of News Reports about Whistleblowers
    Duncan, Megan A.; Perryman, Mallory; Shaughnessy, Brittany (Taylor & Francis, 2021-06-19)
    This experiment (N = 591) tests whether audiences adjust their standards for what qualifies as fair journalism based the transparency of news editors, the source of the news, and the target of an accusation. In the context of a whistleblower scandal, the results suggest the relationship between the audience member’s ideology and the news story publisher and target influence what details the audience thinks journalists should reveal. Additionally, we find transparency from editors can alter those perceptions.
  • Thumbnail Image
    What's in a Label? Negative Credibility Labels in Partisan News
    Duncan, Megan A. (SAGE, 2020-10-13)
    Concern about partisan audiences blindly following partisan news brands while simultaneously being unable to distinguish the credible news from hoax news dominates media criticism and theoretical inquiries. Companies and media literacy advocates have suggested credibility labels as a solution. This experiment tests the effectiveness of credibility labels at the intersection of partisan news brands and partisan news stories. Using news credibility theory and Partisan Media Opinion hypothesis, it investigates the effects credibility labels have on partisan audiences, partisan news brands, and partisan news stories. It finds that credibility labels may be an effective news literacy tool, and that credibility is enhanced when the news story’s ideological perspective does not match the ideology of the news brand.