Korean journal of communication and information (한국언론정보학보)

Korean Association For Communication And Information Studies (한국언론정보학회)
권호 표지

Comprehension of a News Story on SNS in Comparison to the Traditional Newspaper

소셜미디어에서의 뉴스 정보 수용과 전통 미디어 뉴스 읽기의 비교 카카오톡의 대화와 신문 비교를 중심으로

  • Lee, Mina (School of Communication and Media, Sookmyung Women's University) ;
  • Yang, Seungchan (School of Communication and Media, Sookmyung Women's University) ;
  • Seo, HeeJung (EBS Research center)
  • 이미나 (숙명여자대학교 미디어학부) ;
  • 양승찬 (숙명여자대학교 미디어학부) ;
  • 서희정 (교육방송연구소)
  • Received : 2016.11.30
  • Accepted : 2017.01.23
  • Published : 2017.02.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This study investigated news comprehension via the social media by comparing the reading of a news story on the news paper. A news story on the social media was suggested to present information in a conversational form, which differs from a traditional reporting style. To compare the different forms of news information presentation, two conditions were created: in a control condition, a news story was written in a traditional reporting form. In the experimental condition, the same news story was constructed in a conversational form. Participants were assigned randomly in one of two conditions. They read the news story and afterwards, they were asked to recall firstly, the core idea of the news story, secondly the whole news story, and finally to answer to the 10 questions that assessed how well they learned from the news story. Participants' responses were content-analyzed and produced six variables, the extent to recall the core idea, the extent to recall the whole story, the extent to recall wrong information, the extent to recall additional information, the extent to recall causally related contents in general, and finally the extent to recall causally related contents in story-specific. Analyses on the six variables revealed that the group in the news paper condition recalled more core idea, the whole story, and additional information than the group in the social media. But the news paper condition recalled less of wrong information than the group in the social media condition. Additionally, the news paper condition learned more than the group in the social media. Regarding the recall of causally related contents, the general causal relationships were recalled more in the group in the social media condition but the story specific causal relationships were recalled more in the group in the news paper condition. The findings seemingly indicated that a traditional news reporting contributes to news story comprehension more than the conversational form. Authors however added discussions and advised that the findings needed to be read under caution.

본 연구는 소셜미디어에서의 뉴스 정보 수용을 기존의 전통적인 신문기사 형식의 뉴스 읽기와 비교 분석했다. 전통적인 신문기사 읽기 조건과 비교할 때 소셜미디어를 통한 뉴스 전달은 대화저널리즘 양식으로 이뤄진다고 보았으며 이러한 양식의 차이가 뉴스 정보의 기억과 구성에 어떤 차이를 만들어내는지를 유사실험을 통해 관찰했다. 실험에서는 동일한 내용의 가상의 기사를 전통적인 신문기사 형식과 소셜미디어의 대화체 이야기 정보 방식으로 제작해 신문기사 조건과 소셜미디어 조건에 활용했다. 뉴스의 이해 정도를 정보 기억(전체 내용 기억, 주요 내용 기억, 내용을 틀리게 기억한 정도, 부가적인 정보의 기억, 사실 정보 획득)과 구성(인과관계 기억)의 두 가지 측면에서 관찰했다. 분석결과, 신문기사 조건은 소셜미디어 조건보다 정보 기억에서 더 뛰어났다. 전체 내용의 기억 정도, 주요 내용을 기억한 정도, 부가적인 정보를 기억한 정도, 사실 정보 획득 등에서 신문기사 조건이 우세했으며, 내용을 틀리게 기억한 정도는 소셜미디어 조건이 더 높은 것으로 나타났다. 인과관계 기억의 경우, 일반적 인과관계를 기억하는 정도는 소셜미디어 조건이 더 뛰어났지만 해당 기사에 특정한 인과관계를 기억하는 정도는 신문기사 조건이 소셜미디어 조건보다 유의미하게 더 높은 것으로 나타났다. 이러한 연구결과는 전통적인 신문기사 형식이 뉴스 내용을 이해하는 데 도움이 됨을 시사하고 있다.

Keywords

References

  1. 곽민영 (2011). 기사 스타일이 독자의 흥미, 신뢰도, 기억에 미치는 영향: 내러티브와 역피라미드 스타일 비교를 중심으로. 숙명여자대학교 박사논문.
  2. 김경모 (2012). 새로운 저널리즘 환경과 온라인 뉴스 생산. <언론정보연구>, 49권 1호, 7-37.
  3. 박선희 (2012). SNS 뉴스 소통: 다중성과 구술성. <언론정보연구>, 49권 1호, 37-73.
  4. 정회경.김사승 (2007). 온라인 시민저널리즘의 뉴스생산양식 특성에 관한 분석. <한국언론학보>, 51권 2호, 124-152.
  5. 최민재.양승찬 (2009). <소셜미디어와 저널리즘>. 한국언론진흥재단.
  6. 최민재.양승찬.이강형 (2013). <디지털 미디어 시대의 저널리즘>. 한국언론진흥재단.
  7. 한국언론진흥재단 (2015). <2015 언론수용자의식조사>. 한국언론진흥재단.
  8. Baumgartner, J. C., & Morris, J. S. (2009). My Face tube politics: Social networking web sites and political engagement of young adults. Social Science Computer Review, 28, 24-44.
  9. Bryant, J., Thompson, S. J., & Finklea, B. W. (2013). Fundamentals of Media Effects. 배현석 역(2016)j, <미디어 효과의 기초: 이론과 연구>. 한울아카데미.
  10. Bright, J. (2016). The social news gap: How news reading and news sharing diverge, Journal of Communication, 66(3), 343-365. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12232
  11. Cappella, J. N., Kim, H. S., & Albarracín, D. (2015). Selection and transmission processes for information in the emerging media environment: Psychological motives and message characteristics. Media psychology, 18(3), 396-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2014.941112
  12. Collins, W. A. (1983). Cognitive processing in television viewing. In E. Wartella & D. C. Whitney (Vol. Eds.), Mass communication review yearbook (pp. 195-209). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  13. van Dijk, T. A. (1988). News as Discourse. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  14. van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New york; Academic Press.
  15. van den Broek, P., & Gustafson, M. (1990). Comprehension and memory for texts: Three generations of reading research. In S. R. Goldman, A. C. Graesser, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Narrative comprehension, causality, and coherence (pp. 15-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  16. van den Broek, P., Risden, K., Fletcher, C., & Thurlow, R. (1996). A "landscape" view of reading: Fluctuating patterns of activation and the construction of a stable memory representation. In B. Britton & A. Graesser (Eds.), Models of understanding text (pp. 165-188). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  17. Eveland, W. P. Jr., Morey, A. C., & Hutchens, M. J. (2011). Beyond deliberation: New directions for the study of informal political conversation from a communication perspective. Journal of Communication, 61, 1082-1103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01598.x
  18. Graber, D. (1988): Processing the News: How People Tame the Information Tide (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
  19. Gunter, B. (1987). Poor reception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  20. Glynn, C. J., Huge, M. E., & Hoffman, L. H. (2012). All news that's fit to post: A profile of news use on social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 113-119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.017
  21. Hermida, A. (2010a). From TV to Twitter: How Ambient News Became Ambient Journalism. A Journal of Media and Culture, 13(2).
  22. Hermida, A. (2010b). Twittering the news. Journalism Practice, 4(3), 297-308. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512781003640703
  23. Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  24. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363-394. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
  25. Knobloch, S., Patzig, G., Mende, A., & Hastall, M. (2004). Affective news: Effects of discourse structure in narratives on suspense, curiosity, and enjoyment while reading news and novels. Communication Research, 31(3), 259-287 https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650203261517
  26. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Sharma, N., Hansen, D. L., & Alter, S. (2005). Impact of popularity indications on readers selective exposure to online news. Journal of Broadcast and Electronic Media, 49(3), 296-313. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15506878jobem4903_3
  27. Lang, A. (1989). Effects of chronological presentation of information on processing and memory for broadcast news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 33(4), 441-452. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838158909364093
  28. Lang, A. (2000). The limited capacity model of mediated message processing. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 46-70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02833.x
  29. Lee, M., Roskos, B., & Ewoldsen, D. R. (2013). The impact of subtitles on comprehension of narrative film, Media Psychology, 16(4), 412-440 https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2013.826119
  30. Lee, M. Roskos-Ewoldsen, B., & Roskos-Ewoldsen, D. R. (2008): Applying the landscape model to comprehending discourse from TV news stories, Discourse Processes, 45(6), 519-544. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530802359566
  31. Lee C. S., & Ma, L. (2012). News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience, Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 331-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.002
  32. Ma, L., Lee, C. S., & Goh, D. H-L. (2014). Understanding news sharing in social media. Online Information Review, 38(5), 598-615. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-10-2013-0239
  33. Magliano, J. P., Dijkstra, K., & Zwaan, R. A. (1996). Generating predictive inferences while viewing a movie. Discourse Processes, 22, 199-224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539609544973
  34. Park, N., Kee, K. F., & Valenzuela, S. (2009). Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12, 729-733. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2009.0003
  35. Pew Research Center (2013). Future of Mobile News. Available at http://www.journalism.org/2012/10/01/future-mobile-news/.
  36. Pottker, H. (2003). News and its communicative quality: the inverted pyramid-when and why did it appear? Journalism Studies, 4(4), 501-511. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670032000136596
  37. Robinson, J. P. & Davis, D. K. (1986). Comprehension of a single evening's news (pp.107-132). In J. P. Robin and M. R. Levy (Eds.), The learning from television news. Sage: Beverly Hills, CA.
  38. Shim, H. (2014), Narrative journalism in the contemporary newsroom: The rise of new paradigm in news format? Narrative Inquiry, 24(1), 77-95. https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.24.1.04shi
  39. Singer, J. (2014). User-Generated Visibility: Secondary gatekeeping in a shared media space. New Media and Society, 16(1), pp. 55-73. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813477833
  40. Sternadori, M. (2008). Cognitive processing of news as a function of structure: A comparison between inverted pyramid and chronology. University of Missouri-Columbia.
  41. Trabasso, T., & Sperry, L. L. (1985). Causal relatedness and importance of story events. Journal of memory and language, 24, 595-611. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(85)90048-8
  42. Weeks, B. E., & Holbert, R. L. (2013). Predicting Dissemination of News Content in Social Media: A Focus on Reception, Friending, and Partisanship. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 90(2), 212-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699013482906
  43. Wise, K., Bolls, P., Myers, J., & Sternadori, M. (2009). When words collide online: How writing style and video intensity affect cognitive processing of online news. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(4), 532-546. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838150903333023
  44. Yaros, R. A. (2006). Is it the medium or the message? Structuring complex news to enhance engagement and situational understanding by nonexperts, Communication Research, 33, 4, 285-309. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650206289154
  45. Zwaan, R. A., Langston, M. C., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). The construction of situation models in narrative comprehension: An event-indexing model. Psychological Science, 6(5), 292-297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00513.x
  46. Zwaan, R. A., & Magliano, J. P., & Graesser, A. C. (1995). Dimensions of situation model construction in narrative comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, memory and cognition, 21(2), 386-397. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.2.386
  47. Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162-185. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162
  48. Zwaan, R. A., Radvansky, G., Hilliard, A. E., & Curiel, J. M. (2009). Constructing multidimensional situation models during reading. Scientific Studies of reading, 2(3), 199-220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532799xssr0203_2