Selective communication: what is it and how does this bias affect us?

Selective communication is an example of how we value more what fits our ideas.

People have different opinions and beliefs, nothing new. Our political ideology can make us see with better or worse eyes the way in which a newscast or a social network account informs us.

If a media outlet gives us news that contradicts our belief system, it is quite likely that we will change the medium or relativize what it tells us, that is, we select the type of exposure we want to receive.

But not only do we select the information we want to receive, we also select the information we want to say, even if we have little certainty that it is true. This phenomenon has been called selective communication and has recently been addressed experimentally. Let's take a closer look.

What is selective communication?

Selective communication is a cognitive bias that consists in the fact that people are less likely to share certain information that contradicts our beliefs and attitudes, especially those that have to do with our ideology or political militancy, even if they have to do with our ideology or political militancy.especially those that have to do with our ideology or political militancy, even if we believe that the information contrary to our opinion or belief is true. In other words, we are more likely to communicate data that is not very objective but that coincides with how we think than to share truthful information that is contrary to our opinion.

This phenomenon has begun to be addressed experimentally relatively recently, and among those who have studied it are researchers Pierce Ekstrom and Calvin K. Lai. Both authors point out that, for a long time, the focus has been on how our political opinions and our political affiliation to a political group causes a bias in the way we treat information.

It was already known that people are very selective when they receive information, whether they read, hear or see it, and consequently believe it. This particular phenomenon is called selective exposure and consists of the tendency of people to expose themselves to information, opinions or media that are ideologically aligned or that offer a way of delivering news and data that is agreeable, as long as it does not involve a clash between their way of seeing the world and the way in which new information is presented to them.

Selective exposure and selective communication would be two sides of the same coin.. While selective exposure implies that the person selects the information he/she wants to receive, thus reinforcing his/her pre-existing views and avoiding those that contradict his/her opinion, selective communication implies saying what is in tune with his/her way of seeing things. In one phenomenon the message we receive is selected and in the other the message we emit is selected.

Selective communication is a very interesting phenomenon because it shows how people are biased not only when receiving information, but also when transmitting it to others. Even if we are people who perceive reality very clearly, without any cognitive bias whatsoever (which is practically impossible), when we communicate "facts" we are not able to communicate them to others. when we communicate "facts" we cannot avoid presenting inaccurate or distorted versions of reality..

Relationship of this phenomenon to politics

Pierce Ekstrom and Calvin K. Lai conducted four studies with a total sample of 2,293 participants, some of whom identified themselves as liberal and others as conservative. The experiment consisted of presenting them with the positive and negative effects of two new policy measures: an increase in the minimum wage and a ban on assault weapons.

After reading one positive and one negative effect associated with each of the two policies, participants were asked if they really believed there was a relationship between those two policies and the effects they were told about. In addition to that, they were asked whether they believed they themselves were more or less likely to communicate those findings or relationships to a loved one, friend, or family member.

As expected there were differences between liberal and conservative participants.. Liberals were more likely to believe in the positive effects of raising the minimum wage and banning assault weapons, while conservatives were more likely to believe in the negative effects of both measures.

According to the researchers and in line with the data found by their own research, when ideology, militancy or political opinion is at stake, it is difficult to persuade people to believe in political facts that are uncomfortable to them, however true and objective they may be. If a person is presented with a fact that is inconsistent or contrary to his or her ideology, identity or aptitudes, no matter how objective the fact may be, the person will not want to believe it, the person will not want to believe it and will not be sensitive to it..

But beyond this, the researchers found that participants were more likely to focus on and communicate information that supported their political ideology, even if that data was not at all reliable. In fact, this selective communication of information favorable to their political viewpoint occurred regardless of whether the participants believed the facts they conveyed were accurate or not. In other words, they might well think that what they were saying was dubious and still communicate it to others.

What this effect demonstrates is that even if we successfully persuade someone that their view is unsubstantiated or "wrong," this is no guarantee that the person will not continue to communicate "facts" to those closest to them that continue to give strength to their particular way of thinking. That is to say, we can give true facts and that person will continue to transmit false ones..

Selective exposure and communication and Fake News.

With the irruption of the Internet and social networks, the transmission of fake news or "Fake News" has become a reality and current issue. While the more traditional media, such as newspapers, television or radio, are not free of political ideology, the Internet has served as a platform for anyone without any journalism studies to share their opinions and ideology to millions of people.

Based on the theory of selective exposure, people tend to look for media that are similar to our way of thinking, and the Internet is the place where it is quite likely that we will find one that is very close to how we think. This should not surprise us since the Internet is so immense that we can practically find any blog, Youtube channel, Twitter page or online newspaper of any political ideology we can imagine.

This fact has its good things and its bad things. The main advantage is that we can find a much more diverse world of opinions and facts than those offered by television channels or broadsheet newspapers, allowing us to learn about events that are very different from those offered by the mainstream media.The main advantage is that we can find a much more diverse world of opinions and facts than those offered by TV channels or broadsheet newspapers, allowing us to learn about events that are rarely going to appear on a TV news program or on the front page of a newspaper. However, it has a very big disadvantage, directly related to the bias of selective exposure and selective communication.

Although it is true that many people prefer to follow profiles of different ideologies on social networks and thus have a broader perspective, the reality is that many people choose to follow only accounts related to their way of thinking. These same accounts fall into the bias of selective communication, only transmitting the information that is most convenient for them. In turn, their followers only share their content and the followers of those followers see that information and, thus, an endless chain of sharing can begin.

In an ideal world, regardless of its ideology, every media outlet would transmit truthful, honest and real information.This is nothing more than a utopia. If the classic media can already share unreliable news, let alone accounts on social networks and other large platforms that are controlled by people who are more motivated by their own political ideology than by their desire to inform. It is not difficult to imagine that these accounts can very easily share a hoax, a false news item that, despite being a lie, is liked by the followers of that account.

Thus, both selective exposure and selective communication are two biases that are highly implicated in the transmission of Fake News, especially in social networks. The Internet has helped people to expose themselves to only those media that are very close to their way of thinking and, in turn, these people only share information that they agree with, regardless of whether they believe it to be true or not, which contributes to a false piece of information being widely transmitted throughout the population.

Fortunately, understanding that humans are victims of bias can help us avoid this type of news. Instead of following only one media outlet or media with the same ideological profile, it is advisable to follow people with the same ideological profile, it is advisable to follow people with different opinions.. This will not prevent us from wanting to believe one or another news of dubious reliability but, at least, it will allow us to have a broader perspective of what is happening in this world and, consequently, a more informed and objective view.

Bibliographical references:

• Ekstrom, P. D., & Lai, C. K. (2020). The Selective Communication of Political Information. Social Psychological and Personality Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620942365
• Moya, M. (1999): Persuasión y cambio de actitudes. En J.F. Morales y C. Huici (Coords.): Psicología Social, 153-170. Madrid: McGraw-Hill.
• McGuire, W. J. (1985): Attitudes and attitude change. En G. Lindzey y E. Aronson (Eds.): The handbook of social psychology, vol. 2. Nueva York: Random House.
• Rivero, G (2016). El consumo de noticias por Internet, ¿cámaras de eco? España: Politikon. https://politikon.es/2016/02/26/el-consumo-de-noticias-por-internet-camaras-de-eco/