The Challenge of Measuring Media Exposure: Reply to Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz
The Challenge of Measuring Media Exposure: Reply to Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz
复制标题
衡量媒体曝光度的挑战：回复 Dilliplane、Goldman 和 Mutz
DOI：
10.1080/10584609.2013.819539
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
7.5
通讯作者：
Markus Prior
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Markus Prior
长期以来，政治传播研究一直受到媒体曝光的不准确自我报道的困扰。迪利普兰、高盛和穆茨(2013)提出了一项新的基于调查的“电视政治曝光率”指标，避免了一些导致自我报告错误的特征，美国国家选举研究已经采用了这些特征。然而，新措施的有效性尚未得到独立测试。一项分析揭示了几个弱点。首先，新测量的结构效度很低，因为它没有试图衡量新闻节目、新闻频道或整个新闻的曝光量。其次，从几个不同的标准来看，它的收敛效度较差。例如，新的衡量标准显示，随着2008年总统选举的临近，新闻曝光率几乎没有增加。第三，作者的预测效度标准既不必要也不充分。迪利普兰、高盛和穆茨是正确的，他们认为，以有效和可靠的方式衡量调查受访者的媒体曝光率对于政治传播研究的进展至关重要。但鉴于许多受访者无法报告自己的曝光情况，有必要对调查受访者的媒体使用情况进行自动监控。
Political communication research has long been plagued by inaccurate self-reports of media exposure. Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz (2013) propose a new survey-based measure of “televised exposure to politics” that avoids some of the features that lead to self-report error and that has already been adopted by the American National Election Study. Yet the validity of the new measure has not been independently tested. An analysis reveals several weaknesses. First, construct validity of the new measure is low because it does not attempt to measure the amount of exposure to news programs, news channels, or news overall. Second, its convergent validity is poor by several different criteria. For example, the new measure shows barely any increase in news exposure as the 2008 presidential election approached. Third, the authors' criterion for predictive validity is neither necessary nor sufficient. Dilliplane, Goldman, and Mutz are right that measuring the media exposure of survey respondents in a valid and reliable way is critical for progress in political communication research. But given the inability of many respondents to report their own exposure, it is necessary to monitor the media use of survey respondents automatically.