Two Different Motivations on Agenda Setting: Need for Orientation and Motivated Reasoning

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 484-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Na Yeon Lee
2014 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 68-93
Author(s):  
Maxwell McCombs ◽  
Natalie J. Stroud

The concept of Need for Orientation introduced in the early years of agenda-setting research provided a psychological explanation for why agenda-setting effects occur in terms of what individuals bring to the media experience that determines the strength of these effects. Until recently, there had been no significant additions to our knowledge about the psychology of agenda-setting effects. However, the concept of Need for Orientation is only one part of the answer to the question about why agenda setting occurs. Recent research outlines a second way to answer the why question by describing the psychological process through which these effects occur. In this review, we integrate four contemporary studies that explicate dual psychological paths that lead to agenda-setting effects at the first and second levels. We then examine how information preferences and selective exposure can be profitably included in the agenda-setting framework. Complementing these new models of information processing and varying attention to media content and presentation cues, an expanded concept of psychological relevance, motivated reasoning goals (accuracy versus directional goals), and issue publics are discussed.


Author(s):  
Maxwell McCombs

The evolution of agenda setting over the past 50 years is an in-depth, large-scale case study of the scientific method. This oscillating history of theoretical explication and extensive empirical investigation has identified major aspects of the language of journalism that have significant impact on the formation of public opinion. The theory of agenda setting now includes three levels of agenda setting effects, intermedia agenda setting and the concept of compelling arguments that identify key aspects of the language of journalism. Other theoretical concepts, need for orientation, and most recently civic osmosis and agendamelding explicate the process of agenda setting. All of these are intellectual tools for dealing with the contemporary problem of fake news.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 105-123
Author(s):  
Chris J. Vargo

Abstract 50 years have passed since the seminal 1968 election study was conducted in Chapel Hill, North Carolina. A conference was held with formative theorists Drs. Shaw, Weaver and McCombs. Presentations clustered into 9 clear areas. First, there were areas undergoing theoretical expansion: (1) agenda building, (2) Network Agenda Setting (NAS), (3) Need For Orientation (NFO), and (4) agendamelding. Beyond the established areas, (5) new theoretical directions were proposed. Other work tested and validated the theory in the current digital and political landscape. This included work on (6) the current U.S. political climate, and (7) agenda setting in unique international conditions. Methodological boundaries were pushed, with presentations focused on (8) qualitative agenda setting and (9) best practices for big data and on social media. This article summarizes the aforementioned themes and synthesizes comments raised in discussion at the conference.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document