No, It Is Not All About Selective Exposure: Information Selection Strategies in Referendums

This article presents an in-depth understanding of information selection strategies in referendums. It builds on the theories of motivated reasoning, cognitive dissonance, information utility, and social identity to examine selective exposure in the context of referendums, and highlights how individuals select information, opting for either congruent and partisan (selective choice) or balanced and discrepant (enlightened choice) sources of information. Empirically, our study relies on two cross-sectional online surveys ( N = 2,245; N = 735) that took place in a real referendum campaign on an Energy Act in Switzerland. We exposed respondents to different information contexts and measured whether they chose selectively or in an enlightened way. We conclude that individuals choose balanced or discrepant sources of information more frequently than the literature on selective exposure suggests. Moreover, attitude strength plays a twofold role: In a pre-campaign context, attitude strength motivates individuals’ enlightened choice; mid-campaign, however, it strengthens voters’ selective choice.