Dissecting cognitive, affective, and behavioral facets of attitudinal conflict in selective exposure and selective response

Recent research has established an uncongeniality bias (a preference to reply to attitudinally uncongenial social media content) that runs counter to the notion that individuals prefer like-minded content. Two preregistered studies ( N = 222, N = 227) explored this uncongeniality bias by investigating the subjective attitudinal conflict that individuals report when reading congenial and uncongenial comments. Results from Study 1 suggest that low cognitive conflict is associated with a congeniality bias ( b = -0.33, 95 % CI = [-0.41, -0.25]) whereas high affective conflict is associated with an uncongeniality bias ( b = 0.22, 95 % CI = [0.14, 0.29]). Key findings from Study 2 show that the uncongeniality bias is moderated by emotion reactivity, suggesting that individuals who experience strong and persistent emotions are more likely to reply to uncongenial comments. Moreover, results provide tentative evidence that the congeniality bias can be linked to “cold cognition” whereas the uncongeniality bias is associated with “hot cognition”. This may explain the heated nature of discussions in comment sections. • Attitudinal conflict is dissected into cognitive, affective, and behavioral facets. • Willingness to read more is mostly influenced by the cognitive facet. • Replying to previous comments is mostly influenced by the affective facet. • The tendency to reply to uncongenial comments is moderated by emotion reactivity.