Social Judgment Theory
While conducting this research project, I will be drawing from Social Judgment Theory. Carolyn Sherif, Muzafer Sherif, Roger Nebergall, and Carl Hovland formed the Social Judgment Theory in 1961 in order to understand how people can hear the same information but judge it differently. They describe three reasons that groups do not understand the same information. First is situational limitations, which is lack of time or lack of information. Second is the wrong focus, described as a debate over the outcomes of certain ideas or decisions. Third is cognitive limitations, which can be simply put as an inability to comprehend the information received (Steinmann, Smith, Jurdem, and Hammond, 1977). This older reading, by Steinmann, Smith, Jurdem and Hammond, is informative for understanding the original ideas of the Social Judgment Theory, while in more recent work (Aghbolagh, Zamani, Paolini, and Chen, 2020) Social Judgment Theory can be broken into three zones of acceptance. The first zone is latitude of acceptance, where individuals find opinions acceptable. Zone two is the latitude of rejection, where individuals find objection in opinions. Zone three is the latitude of noncommitment, where the individual is not committed to an opinion, most likely because it does not impact them or they do not have an interest in it. Using Social Judgment Theory while researching media bias of Critical Race Theory in news resources will provide a background on how individuals and groups accept or reject others opinions. This will be crucial to understanding the impact of media bias on the public, and how this information can cause partisanship in political parties.
Critical Race Theory in K-12 Education
Within the discussion of Critical Race Theory in the news is the impact that it has on students who are learning about CRT. As mentioned earlier, Critical Race Theory that is used to frame subjects taught in schools is much different than the theory itself, which is taught in college settings. However, this is not understood by the general public (Paton 2016, Ledesma 2015, Cole 2020). The idea of Critical Race Theory is used in K-12 schools to reframe the teaching of history, social studies, and civics, and connect perceptions and experiences to institutions that are still in place causing oppression (Chapman et al 2013). Within this framework, students are able to connect their perceptions and experiences of oppression with an understanding of what they and their peers can do to make changes to these systems. Scholars have found that students who are able to learn a mere critical history of the United States, especially minority students, tend to do better in school and after graduation (Aviles 2015, Benjamin 2020, Chapman 2020, Kohli 2017, Spiess 2020). Using Critical Race theory to frame K-12 subjects teaches students to think critically, which will prepare them for the outside world, whether that be college or the work force (Benjamin et al 2020). Having an open conversation in schools will also benefit minority students in forming their own identity and not being forced to conform to ‘white’ culture (Chapman et al 2013). Allowing for an open conversation in schools to create a welcoming environment for minorities is important not only for emotional well being, but as mentioned before, for graduation and post graduation success. Based on previous studies, Critical Race Theory in K-12 education is useful and overall important to the success of students to make change inside and outside of school. However, the ability to make changes to these programs cannot happen without the proper understanding of how media bias and information distribution works because of the misunderstandings that are produced through these news outlets.
Online Sorting for News Bias
When it comes to online searches, it has become more evident through exposure from the media that search engines develop bias. Search engines use algorithms to find individuals’ previous searches in order to filter the information given to the user (Kulshrestha 2018). Not only does this occur with web searches, but also with the increasingly used network of social media (Hamborg 2018, Spinde 2022). One major influence on media bias is who sponsors different news outlets, and what political biases they have (Bailard 2016; Barnidge et al 2020; Budak, Goel and Reo, 2016). Sponsorship of news sources can come from different industries and political affiliation. Giving sponsorships can come with an attached bias of the donor, causing more biased information. Understanding the possible biases in these news sources is especially important in becoming an informed member of society (Yair 2018). However, it is also important to know what to do as an individual that knows about political bias in news sources.
Political Polarization and ‘Fake News’
Arguably one of the biggest problems in the United States currently is the polarization between political parties. This comes from citizens’ inability to see the opposing side’s point of view, which may have been persuaded by misleading or ‘fake news’ (Hameleers and Brosius, 2020; Spinde et al 2022; van der Linden, Panagopoulos and Roozenbeek, 2020). Jennifer Sadler (2020), takes a deeper look at how media can be misinterpreted and looks at the undertones of how mass media is produced. When misinformation is combined with online sorting, a person’s opinion is constantly reinforced in their mind and they are no longer able to see their own biases, but they do see the bias in others perceptions (Spinde et al 2022). Understanding how fake news and misinformation is spread, consumed, and acted upon is crucial to understanding partisanship and the divide in political news reporting.