The Immensely Inflated News Audience: Assessing Bias in Self-Reported News Exposure

Markus Prior

Public Opinion Quarterly · 2009 · 555 citations · 31 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Many studies of media effects rely on self‑reported news exposure as a key independent variable, yet its validity has not been established. The study systematically evaluates the accuracy of survey‑based self‑reports of news exposure, prompted by anecdotal evidence of discrepancies. The authors compare survey estimates to Nielsen estimates, which are independent of self‑reporting. Survey estimates overreport news exposure, exaggerating it by an average factor of three and up to eightfold for certain demographics, suggesting that apparent media effects may arise from reporting inaccuracies rather than true exposure differences.

Abstract

Many studies of media effects use self-reported news expo- sure as their key independent variable without establishing its validity. Motivated by anecdotal evidence that people's reports of their own me- dia use can differ considerably from independent assessments, this study examines systematically the accuracy of survey-based self-reports of news exposure. I compare survey estimates to Nielsen estimates, which do not rely on self-reports. Results show severe overreporting of news exposure. Survey estimates of network news exposure follow trends in Nielsen ratings relatively well, but exaggerate exposure by a factor of 3 on average and as much as eightfold for some demographics. It follows that apparent media effects may arise not because of differences in ex- posure, but because of unknown differences in the accuracy of reporting exposure.

References

31