Journal of New Media and Mass Communication

Published by: Conscientia Beam
Online ISSN: 2410-6585
Print ISSN: 2413-841X
Quick Submission    Login/Submit/Track

No. 1

Perspectives and Attitudes on the Credibility of News on Social Networking (SNSS) Sites: Urgent Need of Research Work

Pages: 25-33
Find References

Finding References


Perspectives and Attitudes on the Credibility of News on Social Networking (SNSS) Sites: Urgent Need of Research Work

Search :
Google Scholor
Search :
Microsoft Academic Search
Cite

DOI: 10.18488/journal.91/2016.3.1/91.1.25.33

Citation: 1

Amjad Omar Safori , Nik Adzrieman Abdul Rahman , Rosli Mohammed

Export to    BibTeX   |   EndNote   |   RIS

  1. Alejandro, J., 2010. Journalism in the age of social media. University of Oxford: Reuters Institute.
  2. Armbrust, W., 2012. A history of new media in the Arab Middle East. Journal for Cultural Research, 16(2-3): 155-174.
  3. Azza, A., 2006. The credibility of the Arab media (Concepts - Standards). Cairo: The Arab Publishing and Distribution.
  4. Beckett, C., 2011. Supermedia: Saving journalism so it can save the world. U.S: John Wiley & Sons.
  5. Berlo, D.K., J.B. Lemert and R.J. Mertz, 1969. Dimensions for evaluating the acceptability of message sources. Public Opinion Quarterly, 33(4): 563-576.
  6. Bowman, S. and C. Willis, 2003. We media: How audiences are shaping the future of news and information. U.S.A: The Media Center at the American Press Institute.
  7. Callison, C., 2003. Media relations and the internet: How fortune 500 company web sites assist journalists in news gathering. Public Relations Review, 29(1): 29-41.
  8. Cassidy, W.P., 2007. Online news credibility: An examination of the perceptions of newspaper journalists. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2): 478-498.
  9. Chung, C.J., Y. Nam and M.A. Stefanone, 2012. Exploring online news credibility: The relative influence of traditional and technological factors. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(2): 171-186.
  10. Goode, L., 2009. Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society, 11(8): 1-19.
  11. Greenwood, D.N., 2013. Fame, facebook, and twitter: How attitudes about fame predict frequency and nature of social media use. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 2(4): 222-236.
  12. Hampton, K., L.S. Goulet, L. Rainie and K. Purcell, 2011. Social networking sites and our lives. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project.
  13. Hermida, A., S.C. Lewis and R. Zamith, 2014. Sourcing the Arab spring: A case study of Andy Carvin's sources on twitter during the Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3): 479-499.
  14. Hovland, C.I., I.L. Janis and H.H. Kelley, 1953. Communication and persuasion; psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  15. Johnson, K. and S. Wiedenbeck, 2009. Enhancing perceived credibility of citizen journalism web sites. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 86(2): 332-348.
  16. Kaplan, A. and M. Haenlein, 2010. Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons, 53(1): 59-68.
  17. Kiousis, S., 2001. Public trust or mistrust? Perceptions of media credibility in the information age. Mass Communication & Society, 4(4): 381-403.
  18. Ludtke, M., 2009. Let’s talk: Journalism and social media. Nieman Reports, 63(3): 4-19
  19. Marshall, T.C., K. Lefringhausen and N. Ferenczi, 2015. The big five, self-esteem, and narcissism as predictors of the topics people write about in facebook status updates. Personality and Individual Differences, 85(2015): 35-40.
  20. Mateus, C., 2015. Journalists on online social networks: How technology is challenging journalism ethics. Paper Presented at the CISTI'2015 - 10th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, Águeda, Aveiro, Portugal. pp: 1-6.
  21. Meeds, R., 2015. Changing roles of traditional and online media as trusted news sources in Qatar and their relationships with perceived important issues and interest in politics. Journal of Middle East Media, 11(Fall): 34-61.
  22. Mehrabi, D., H.M. Abu and M.S. Ali, 2009. News media credibility of the internet and television. European Journal of Scientific Research, 11(1): 136-148.
  23. Metzger, M.J., A.J. Flanagin and R.B. Medders, 2010. Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3): 413-439.
  24. Mitchell, A., J. Kiley, J. Gottfried and E. Guskin, 2013. The role of news on facebook. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project.
  25. Mitchell, A. and D. Page, 2014. State of the news media 2014. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center's Internet & American Life Project.
  26. Moody, K.E., 2011. Credibility or convenience?: Political information choices in a media-saturated environment. In L. Zion, R. Spaaij, and M. Nicholson, media international Australia, incorporating culture & policy. Australia: University of Queensland, School of Journalism and Communication, 140: 35-64.
  27. Mourtada, R. and F. Salem, 2011. Facebook usage: Factors and analysis. Arab Social Media Reoprt, 1(1): 1-18.
  28. Murthy, D., 2013. Twitter: Social communication in the twitter age. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
  29. Mustafa, H., 2003. The credibility of the media as they see the elite in Egypt: A case study of media coverage of the war on Iraq. Egyptian Journal of Media Research, 21(2003): 1-74.
  30. Newman, N., 2009. The rise of social media and its impact on mainstream journalism. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, 8(2): 1-5.
  31. Oviedo, V., M. Tornquist, T. Cameron and D. Chiappe, 2015. Effects of media multi-tasking with facebook on the enjoyment and encoding of TV episodes. Computers in Human Behavior, 51(2015): 407-417.
  32. Pearson, M., 2007. The journalist’s guide to media law. Dealing with legal and ethical issues. 3rd Edn., Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
  33. Picard, R.G., 2009. Blogs, tweets, social media, and the news business. Nieman Reports, 63(3): 10-12.
  34. Popoola, M., 2014. New media usage for communication and self concept among journalism and mass communication students in Oyo State, Nigeria. New Media and Mass Communication, 26(2014): 22-34.
  35. Saikaew, K. and C. Noyunsan, 2015. Features for measuring credibility on facebook information. International Scholarly and Scientific Research & Innovation, 9(1): 174-177.
  36. Self, C.C., 2009. Credibility. In D. W. Stacks and M. B. Salwen (Eds). An integrated approach to communication theory and research. 2nd Edn., New York and London: Routledge.
  37. Smith, A. and J. Brenner, 2012. Twitter use 2012. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
  38. Smith, T., 2009. The social media revolution. International Journal of Market Research, 51(4): 559-561.
  39. Stassen, W., 2010. Your news in 140 characters: Exploring the role of social media in journalism. Global Media Journal-African Edition, 4(1): 116-131.
  40. Stroud, N.J., J.M. Scacco, A. Muddiman and A.L. Curry, 2015. Changing deliberative norms on news organizations' facebook sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2): 188-203.
  41. Tang, J. and H. Liu, 2015. Trust in social media. Synthesis Lectures on Information Security, Privacy, & Trust, 10(1): 1-129.
  42. Westerman, D., P.R. Spence and B.V. Heide, 2014. Social media as information source: Recency of updates and credibility of information. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(2): 171-183.
  43. Whiting, A. and D. Williams, 2013. Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4): 362-369.
No any video found for this article.
Amjad Omar Safori , Nik Adzrieman Abdul Rahman , Rosli Mohammed (2016). Perspectives and Attitudes on the Credibility of News on Social Networking (SNSS) Sites: Urgent Need of Research Work. Journal of New Media and Mass Communication, 3(1): 25-33. DOI: 10.18488/journal.91/2016.3.1/91.1.25.33
The role of journalists, and journalism has progressed into a more digitalized journalism. Social Networking Sites (SNSs) allow people to take part in online activities and remove the barrier for online users to publish and share information at any place at any time. Among various social media, this review limits its review scope to SNSs, which have been considered to be the most pertinent social medium used in the field of communication management. This paper intends to show that credibility of social media is the key factor that enhances public engagement and communication effectiveness in the digital/social media. This paper is intended to elicit the factors that could affect the credibility of news from SNSs. Specifically, this article reviews on the needs to study journalist perspectives and attitudes on the credibility of news published on SNSs sites, and found few variables that could affect the credibility of the media and the news, which is linked to journalistic work. These include: the interactive media, technology acceptance, quality of news’ source, and the exposure of the media. The review of the literature suggests the dire research needs to focus on journalists’ perspectives and attitudes towards the new media to ensure credibility of news and journalism is continuously sustained and improved.

Contribution/ Originality
This study contributes to the existing literature that social networking sites contribute to the communication between people and institutions more effectively than other media. This study examines the urgent need to study the views of journalists about the credibility of social networking sites as a new source of news.

Empathy and Communication: A Model of Empathy Development

Pages: 1-24
Find References

Finding References


Empathy and Communication: A Model of Empathy Development

Search :
Google Scholor
Search :
Microsoft Academic Search
Cite

DOI: 10.18488/journal.91/2016.3.1/91.1.1.24

Faith Valente

Export to    BibTeX   |   EndNote   |   RIS

  1. Adams, F., 2001. Empathy, neural imaging and the theory versus simulation debate. Mind & Language, 16(4): 368-392. DOI 10.1111/1468-0017.00176.
  2. Adolphs, R., 2009. The social brain: Neural basis of social knowledge. Annual Review of Psychology, 60(1): 693-716. DOI 10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163514.
  3. Allman, J., K. Watson, N. Tetreault and A. Hakeem, 2005. Intuition and autism: A possible role for Von Economo neurons. Trends in Cognitive Science, 9(8): 367-373. DOI 10.1016/j.tics.2005.06.008.
  4. Button, K.S., G. Lewis and M.R. Munafò, 2012. Understanding emotion: Lessons from anxiety. Behavioral & Brain Sciences, 35(3): 145. DOI 10.1017/S0140525X11001464.
  5. Calder, A., J. Keane, F. Manes, N. Antoun and A. Young, 2000. Impaired recognition and experience of disgust following brain injury. Nature Neuroscience, 3(11): 1077-1078. DOI 10.1038/80586.
  6. Coricelli, G., 2005. Two-levels of metal states attribution: From automaticity to voluntariness. Neuropsychologia, 43(2): 294-300. DOI 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia .2004.11.015.
  7. Craig, A., 2007. Interoception and emotion: A neuroanatomical perspective. In M. Lewis, J. Haviland-Jones, & L. Feldman-Barrett, handbook of emotion. 3rd Edn., New York: Guilford Press. pp: 272-290.
  8. Creswell, J.W., 2013. Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. 3rd Edn., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  9. Davis, M.H., 1983. Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44(1): 113-126. DOI 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113.
  10. Decety, J., 2011. The neuroevolution of empathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 20(1): 35-45. DOI 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06027.x.
  11. Decety, J. and T. Chaminade, 2003. When the self represents the other: A new cognitive neuroscience view on psychological identification. Consciousness and Cognition, 12(4): 577-596. DOI 10.1016/s.1053-8100(03)00076-x.
  12. Decety, J. and J. Grezes, 2006. The power of simulation: Imagining one’s own and other’s behavior. Brain Research, 1079(1): 4-14. DOI 10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.115.
  13. Decety, J. and M. Meyer, 2008. From emotion resonance to empathic understanding: A social developmental neuroscience account. Development & Psychopathology, 20(4): 1053-1080. DOI 10.1017/S0954579408000503.
  14. Decety, J. and Y. Moriguchi, 2007. The empathic brain and its dysfunction in psychiatric populations: Implications for intervention across different clinical conditions. Biopsychosocial Medicine: 1-22. DOI 10.1186/1751-0759.
  15. Decety, J., G.J. Norman, G.G. Berntson and J.T. Cacioppo, 2012. A neurobehavioral evolutionary perspective on the mechanisms underlying empathy. Progress in Neurobiology, 98(1): 38-48. DOI 10.1016/j.pneurobio.2012.05.001.
  16. Dondi, M. and F. Simion, 1999. Can newborns discriminate between their own cry and the cry of another newborn infant? Developmental Psychology, 35(2): 418-427. DOI 10.1037//0012-1649.35.2.418.
  17. Eisenberg, N., N. Eggum and L. Di Giunta, 2010. Empathy related responding: Associations with prosocial behavior, aggression, and intergroup relations. Social Issues and Policy Review, 4: 143-180. DOI 10.1111/j.1751-2409.2010.01020.x.
  18. Eisenberg, N., R.A. Fabes, G. Carlo, R. Poulin, C. Shea, R. Shell and P. Miller, 1991. Personality and socialization correlates of vicarious emotional responding. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 61(3): 459-470. DOI 10.100022-3514.61.3.459.
  19. Eisenberg, N., I.K. Guthrie, A. Cumberland, B.C. Murphy, S.A. Shepard, Z. Qing and G. Carlo, 2002. Prosocial development in early adulthood: A longitudinal study. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 82(6): 993-1006. DOI 10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.993.
  20. Eisenberg, N. and M.A. Okun, 1996. The relations of dispositional regulation and emotionality to elders empathy-related responding and affect while volunteering. Journal of Personality, 64(1): 157-183. DOI 10.1111/1467-6494.ep9606210697.
  21. Eklund, J.H., 2006. Empathy and viewing the other as a subject. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47(5): 399-409. DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9450.2006.00521.x.
  22. Gallese, V., 2003a. The manifold nature of interpersonal relations: The quest for a common mechanism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 358(1431): 517-528. DOI 10.1098/rstb.2002.1234
  23. Gallese, V., 2003b. The roots of empathy: The shared manifold hypothesis and the neural basis of intersubjectivity. Psychopathology, 36(4): 171-180. DOI 10.1159/000072786.
  24. Gallese, V., 2005. Being like me: Self-other identity, mirror neurons, and empathy. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds). Perspectives on imitation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. pp: 101-118.
  25. Gallese, V., 2009. Mirror neurons, embodied simulation, and the neural basis of social identification. Psychoanalytic Dialogues, 19(5): 519-536. DOI 10.1080/10481880903231910.
  26. Gallese, V. and G. Lakoff, 2005. The brain’s concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22(3-4): 455-479. DOI 10.1080/02643290442000310
  27. Gallese, V. and T. Metzinger, 2003. Motor ontology: The representational reality of goals, actions and selves. Philosophical Psychology, 16(3): 365-388. DOI 10.1080/0951508032000121760.
  28. Gerdes, K.E., E.A. Segal, K.F. Jackson and J.L. Mullins, 2011. Teaching empathy: A framework rooted in social cognitive neuroscience and social justice. Journal of Social Work Education, 47(1): 109-121. DOI 10.2307/23044437.
  29. Gleichgerrcht, E., T. Torralva, A. Rattazzi, V. Marenco, M. Roca and F. Manes, 2013. Selective impairment of cognitive empathy for moral judgment in adults with high functioning autism. Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience, 8(7): 780-788. DOI 10.1093/scan/nss067.
  30. Hoffman, M.L., 2000. Empathy and moral development. 1st Edn., Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  31. Hsiao, M., W. Tseng, H. Huang and S. Gau, 2013. Effects of autistic traits on social and school adjustment in children and adolescents: The moderating roles of age and gender. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 34(1): 254-265. DOI 10.1016/j.ridd.2012.08.001.
  32. Iacoboni, M., I. Molnar-Szakacs, V. Gallese, G. Buccino, J.C. Mazziotta and G. Rizzolatti, 2005. Grasping the intentions of others with one’s own mirror neuron system. Plos Biology, 3(3): 529-535. DOI 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030079.
  33. Jacob, P., 2008. Mirror neurons or concept neurons? Mind & Language, 23(2): 190-223. DOI 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2007.00337.x.
  34. Lamm, C., C.D. Batson and J. Decety, 2007. The neural substrate of human empathy: Effects of perspective-taking and cognitive appraisal. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(1): 42-58. DOI 10.1162/jocn.2007.19.1.42.
  35. Lamm, C., A.N. Meltzoff and J. Decety, 2009. How do we empathize with someone who is not like us? A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22(2): 362-376. DOI 10.1162/jocn.2009.21186.
  36. Lamm, C.C., E.C. Porges, J.T. Cacioppo and J.J. Decety, 2008. Perspective taking is associated with specific facial responses during empathy for pain. Brain Research, 1227: 153-161. DOI 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.06.066.
  37. Leigh, R., K. Oishi, J. Hsu, M. Lindquist, R.F. Gottesman, S. Jarso and A.E. Hillis, 2013. Acute lesions that impair affective empathy. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 136(8): 2539-2549. DOI 10.1016/j.neuroscience.2012.12.059.
  38. Lockwood, P.L., G. Bird, M. Bridge and E. Viding, 2013. Dissecting empathy: High levels of psychopathic and autistic traits are characterized by difficulties in different social information processing domains. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7: 1-6. DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00760.
  39. Mathersul, D., S. McDonald and J.A. Rushby, 2013. Understanding advanced theory of mind and empathy in high-functioning adults with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology, 35(6): 655-668. DOI 10.1080/13803395.2013.809700.
  40. McLellan, T.T. and A.A. McKinlay, 2013. Sensitivity to emotion, empathy and theory of mind: Adult performance following childhood TBI. Brain Injury, 27(9): 1032-1037. DOI 10.3109/02699052.2013.794965.
  41. Michalik, N.M., N. Eisenberg, T.L. Spinrad, B. Ladd, M. Thompson and C. Valiente, 2007. Longitudinal relations among parental emotional expressivity and sympathy and prosocial behavior in adolescence. Social Development, 16(2): 286-309. DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9507.2007.00385.x.
  42. Mills, S., 2001. The idea of different folk psychologies. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 9(4): 501-519. DOI 10.1080/09672550110081285.
  43. Mitchell, J.P., 2008. Contributions of functional neuroimaging to the study of social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(2): 142-146. DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00564.x.
  44. Nakao, H. and S. Itakura, 2009. An integrated view of empathy: Psychology, philosophy, and neuroscience. Integrative Psychological & Behavioral Science, 43(1): 42-52. DOI 10.1007/s12124-008-9066-7.
  45. Patton, M.Q., 1990. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  46. Plutchik, R., 1987. Evolutionary bases of empathy. In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.). Empathy and its development. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. pp: 38-46.
  47. Preston, S.D. and F.B.M. De Waal, 2002. Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25: 1-72. DOI 10.1017/S0140525X02000018.
  48. Rizzolatti, G., L. Fogassi and V. Gallese, 2006. Mirror in the mind. Scientific American, 295(5): 54-61.
  49. Rogers, C.R., 1985. Toward a more human science of the person. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 25(4): 7-24. DOI 10.1177/0022167885254002.
  50. Schwenck, C., B. Göhle, J. Hauf, A. Warnke, C.M. Freitag and W. Schneider, 2014. Cognitive and emotional empathy in typically developing children: The influence of age, gender, and intelligence. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 11(1): 63-76. DOI 10.1080/17405629.2013.808994.
  51. Simon, J., 2009. The art of empirical investigation. 2nd Edn., New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
  52. Taki, Y., B. Thyreau, S. Kinomura, K. Sato, R. Goto, R. Kawashima and H. Fukuda, 2011. Correlations among brain gray matter volumes, age, gender, and hemisphere in healthy individuals. Plos One, 6(7): 1-13. DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0022734.
  53. Van Baaren, R.B., R.W. Holland, K. Kawakami and A. Van Knippenberg, 2004. Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 15(1): 71-74. DOI 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01501012.x.
  54. White, B.A., 2014. Who cares when nobody is watching? Psychopathic traits and empathy in prosocial behaviors. Personality & Individual Differences, 56: 116-121. DOI 10.1016/j.paid.2013.08.033.
  55. Wiehe, V.R., 2003. Empathy and narcissism in a sample of child abuse perpetrators and a comparison sample of foster parents. Child Abuse and Neglect, 27(5): 541-555. DOI 10.1016/ S0145-2134(03)00034-6.
  56. Zahn-Waxler, C. and M. Radke-Yarrow, 1992. Development of concern for others. Developmental Psychology, 28(1): 126-136.
  57. Zajdel, R.T., J. Bloom, G. Fireman and J.T. Larsen, 2013. Children's understanding and experience of mixed emotions: The roles of age, gender, and empathy. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 174(5): 582-603. DOI 10.1080/00221325 .2012.732125.
No any video found for this article.
Faith Valente (2016). Empathy and Communication: A Model of Empathy Development. Journal of New Media and Mass Communication, 3(1): 1-24. DOI: 10.18488/journal.91/2016.3.1/91.1.1.24
Empathy is an important communication skill that has been shown to affect both individual knowledge acquisition and interpersonal relationships. How empathy develops and subsequently influences human interactions, and the consequences associated with those interactions, is the focus of this study. I examine the empathetic perceptions of upper division undergraduate college students and integrate their lived experience with empathy related factors discussed in the literature to describe a model of empathy development. The results suggest people can learn to communicate more efficiently and effectively by developing empathy in them-selves as well as in other people. More specifically, the findings indicate empathy is a function of several internal and external elements beyond biological and environmental antecedents. Respondents associated four internal themes with increased empathetic understanding: emotional sharing, positive relationships, mutual regard, and personal genuineness. Respondents also identified three external themes that moderated the strength or direction of their empathetic perceptions: the perceived similarity, relevance, and availability of the person being observed. Each of these seven themes is explicated in order to discern how one person might better empathize with another or enhance the ability of other people to empathize with them. The practical implications for more empathetic communication are explored, as are suggestions for future research.

Contribution/ Originality
This study documents how empathy develops in human beings and the communication consequences associated with such empathetic development.  The paper provides a review of previous empathetic research before surveying individuals about their personal empathetic experience. Those interviews are analyzed and reveal four mediators and three moderators of empathy development as well as relate a variety of benefits associated with empathetic communication. A synthesis of empathy literature is used in conjunction with survey findings to propose an integrative model of empathy development.  The theoretical contributions of this paper may be useful as a basis for future communication research and applied communication applications.