A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Geiß, Stefan
Data de Publicação: 2022
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375
Resumo: The media’s capacity to stimulate public concern and create a common ground for issues can counteract the fragmentation of society. Assessing the intactness of the media’s agenda-setting function can be an important diagnostic tool for scholars. However, the manifold design choices in agenda-setting research raise the question of how design choice impacts analysis results and potentially leads to methodological artefacts. I compare how the choice between 20 plausible analysis configurations impacts tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis, coefficients, and explanatory power. I also explore changes in agenda-setting effect size over time. I develop a typology of analysis configurations from five basic study design types by four ways of linking content analysis to survey data (5 × 4 = 20). The following design types are compared: three single-survey/between designs (aggregate-cross-sectional, aggregate-longitudinal, and individual-level) and two panel-survey/within designs (aggregate-change and individual-change). I draw on the German Longitudinal Election Study data (2009, 2013, and 2017). All 20 tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis support the hypothesis, independent of the analytical configuration used. The choice of analysis configuration substantially impacts the coefficients and explanatory power attributed to media salience. The individual-level analyses indicate that agenda-setting effects became significantly weaker at later elections, though not linearly. This study provides strong empirical support for the agenda-setting hypothesis independent of design choice.
id RCAP_2ae0b8b252f04abe08904aeac7744e8c
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/5375
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesisagenda-setting; aggregation; design choice; data analysis; data linkage; methodological artefactsThe media’s capacity to stimulate public concern and create a common ground for issues can counteract the fragmentation of society. Assessing the intactness of the media’s agenda-setting function can be an important diagnostic tool for scholars. However, the manifold design choices in agenda-setting research raise the question of how design choice impacts analysis results and potentially leads to methodological artefacts. I compare how the choice between 20 plausible analysis configurations impacts tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis, coefficients, and explanatory power. I also explore changes in agenda-setting effect size over time. I develop a typology of analysis configurations from five basic study design types by four ways of linking content analysis to survey data (5 × 4 = 20). The following design types are compared: three single-survey/between designs (aggregate-cross-sectional, aggregate-longitudinal, and individual-level) and two panel-survey/within designs (aggregate-change and individual-change). I draw on the German Longitudinal Election Study data (2009, 2013, and 2017). All 20 tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis support the hypothesis, independent of the analytical configuration used. The choice of analysis configuration substantially impacts the coefficients and explanatory power attributed to media salience. The individual-level analyses indicate that agenda-setting effects became significantly weaker at later elections, though not linearly. This study provides strong empirical support for the agenda-setting hypothesis independent of design choice.Cogitatio2022-08-31info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/5375Media and Communication; Vol 10, No 3 (2022): Enlightening Confusion: How Contradictory Findings Help Mitigate Problematic Trends in Digital Democracies; 118-1322183-2439reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5375https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5375/5375https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/downloadSuppFile/5375/2349Copyright (c) 2022 Stefan Geißinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGeiß, Stefan2022-12-20T10:58:43Zoai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/5375Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:21:06.393747Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
title A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
spellingShingle A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
Geiß, Stefan
agenda-setting; aggregation; design choice; data analysis; data linkage; methodological artefacts
title_short A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
title_full A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
title_fullStr A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
title_full_unstemmed A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
title_sort A Matter of Perspective? The Impact of Analysis Configurations on Testing the Agenda-Setting Hypothesis
author Geiß, Stefan
author_facet Geiß, Stefan
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Geiß, Stefan
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv agenda-setting; aggregation; design choice; data analysis; data linkage; methodological artefacts
topic agenda-setting; aggregation; design choice; data analysis; data linkage; methodological artefacts
description The media’s capacity to stimulate public concern and create a common ground for issues can counteract the fragmentation of society. Assessing the intactness of the media’s agenda-setting function can be an important diagnostic tool for scholars. However, the manifold design choices in agenda-setting research raise the question of how design choice impacts analysis results and potentially leads to methodological artefacts. I compare how the choice between 20 plausible analysis configurations impacts tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis, coefficients, and explanatory power. I also explore changes in agenda-setting effect size over time. I develop a typology of analysis configurations from five basic study design types by four ways of linking content analysis to survey data (5 × 4 = 20). The following design types are compared: three single-survey/between designs (aggregate-cross-sectional, aggregate-longitudinal, and individual-level) and two panel-survey/within designs (aggregate-change and individual-change). I draw on the German Longitudinal Election Study data (2009, 2013, and 2017). All 20 tests of the agenda-setting hypothesis support the hypothesis, independent of the analytical configuration used. The choice of analysis configuration substantially impacts the coefficients and explanatory power attributed to media salience. The individual-level analyses indicate that agenda-setting effects became significantly weaker at later elections, though not linearly. This study provides strong empirical support for the agenda-setting hypothesis independent of design choice.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-08-31
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375
oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/5375
url https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375
identifier_str_mv oai:ojs.cogitatiopress.com:article/5375
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5375
https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5375
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/5375/5375
https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/downloadSuppFile/5375/2349
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Stefan Geiß
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2022 Stefan Geiß
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Cogitatio
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Media and Communication; Vol 10, No 3 (2022): Enlightening Confusion: How Contradictory Findings Help Mitigate Problematic Trends in Digital Democracies; 118-132
2183-2439
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799130658077933568