Embedding a wiki platform within a traditional survey: A novel approach to assess perceived argument strength in communication research

Jeff Niederdeppe, Daniel A. Gundersen, Andy S.L. Tan, Emma Beth McGinty, Colleen L Barry

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Several prominent theories predict that argument strength plays an important role in message processing and effects. Traditional strategies to measure perceived argument strength have limitations in responsivity to emerging arguments in public discourse. This article examines the utility of a survey-embedded wiki platform (wiki survey) to identify strong and weak arguments in dynamic information environments. Participants completed two wiki surveys, embedded within a larger survey of U.S. adults (N = 1,506), asking them to choose between randomly selected pairs of arguments related to marijuana legalization or to add new arguments to the item pools. The method identified 32 novel, user-generated arguments, over and above an original set of 26 arguments identified by study authors through a review of the literature and a content analysis of news media coverage on the topic. The wiki survey also produced variation in perceived strength of arguments among relevant demographic and social groups.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1863-1889
Number of pages27
JournalInternational Journal of Communication
Volume13
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2019

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Competitive framing theory
  • Elaboration likelihood model
  • Health communication
  • Message effects
  • Persuasion
  • Public opinion

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Communication

Cite this