New communication technologies, old questions

American Behavioral Scientist

Volumn 52, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 8-20

  Yzer, Marco C ^a   Southwell, Brian G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

New communication technologies; New media

Indexed keywords

EID: 48349128425     PISSN: 00027642     EISSN: 15523381     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0002764208321338     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Adamic, L.A., & Glance, N. (2005, August). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Link Discovery, 36-43.
2. Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
3. Beville, H. (1948). The challenge of the new media: Television, FM, and facsimile. Journalism Quarterly, 25 (1). 3-11.
4. Bimber, B. (2000). The study of information technology and civic engagement. Political Communication, 17, 329-333.
5. Brunsting, S., & Postmes, T. (2002). Social movement participation in the digital age: Predicting offline and online collective action. Small Group Research, 33, 525-554.
6. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. The information age: Economy, society and culture (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
7. de Gournay, C., & Smoreda, Z. (2007). Communication technology and sociability: Between local ties and "global ghetto"? In J. E. Katz (Ed.), Machines that become us: The social context of personal communication technology (pp. 57-70). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
8. Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), The psychology of group influence (pp. 209-242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
9. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Digital inequality: From unequal access to differentiated use. In K. Neckerman (Ed.), Social inequality (pp. 355-400). New York: Russell Sage.
10. DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W.R., & Robinson, J.P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307-336.
11. Dubrovsky, V.J., Kiesler, S., & Sethna, B.N. (1991). The equalization phenomenon: Status effects in computer-mediated and face-to-face decision-making groups. Human Computer Interaction, 6, 119-146.
12. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes, Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
13. Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382-389.
14. Fishbein, M. (2000). The role of theory in HIV prevention. AIDS Care, 12, 273-278.
15. Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
16. Fishbein, M., & Yzer, M.C. (2003). Using theory to develop effective health behavior interventions. Communication Theory, 13, 164-183.
17. Franzen, A. (2007). Social capital and the new communication technologies. In J. E. Katz (Ed.), Machines that become us: The social context of personal communication technology (pp. 105-116). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
18. Hamelink, C.J. (2006). Rethinking ICTs. European Journal of Communication 21, 389-396.
19. Hermes, J. (2006). Citizenship in the age of the Internet. European Journal of Communication, 21, 295-309.
20. Hiltz, S.R., & Turoff, M. (1978). The network nation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Janis, I. (1972) Victims of groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
22. Jenkins, H., & Thorburn, D. (2003). Democracy and new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Jones, D.A. (2002). The polarizing effect of new media messages. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 14, 158-174.
24. Joyce, E., & Kraut, R.E. (2006). Predicting continued participation in newsgroups. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, Article 3. Retrieved December 19, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/v0111/issue3/joyce. html
25. Kelly, W., Fisher, D., & Smith, M. (2006). Friends, foes, and fringe: Norms and structure in political discussion networks, ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 151, 412-417.
26. Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being ? American Psychologist, 53, 1017-1031.
27. Lazarsfeld, P., & Merton, R.K. (1954). Friendship as a social process: A substantive and methodological analysis. In M. Berger, T. Abel, & C. H. Page (Eds.), Freedom and control in modern society (pp. 19-66). New York: Van Nostrand.
28. Le Bon, G. (1895). The crowd. London: Unwin.
29. Lee, E.J. (2006). When and how does depersonalization increase conformity to group norms in computer-mediated communication ? Communication Research, 33, 423-447.
30. Lievrouw, L., & Livingstone, S. (Eds.). (2002 a). Handbook of new media: Social shaping and consequences of ICTs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
31. Lievrouw, L. & Livingstone, S. (2002 b). Introduction: The social shaping and consequences of ICTs. In L. Lievrouw & S. Livingstone (Eds.), Handbook of new media: Social shaping and consequences of ICTs (pp. 1-15). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Light, J.S. (2006). Facsimile: A forgotten "new medium" from the 20th century. New Media & Society, 8, 355-378.
33. Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communication in the late nineteenth century. New York: Oxford University Press.
34. McKenna, K.Y.A., & Green, A.S. (2002). Virtual group dynamics. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 116-127.
35. McLeod, D.M., & Hertog, J.K. (1999). Social control, social change, and the mass media's role in the regulation of protest groups. In D. Demers & K. Vishwanath (Eds.), Mass media, social control, and social change: A macrosocial perspective (pp. 305-330). Ames: Iowa State University Press.
36. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J.M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444.
37. McQuail, D. (2006). Editorial introduction. European Journal of Communication, 21, 291-293.
38. Mendelsohn, M., & Nadeau, R. (1996). The magnification and minimization of social cleavages by the broadcast and narrowcast news media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 374-389.
39. Morris, M., & Ogan, C. (1996). The Internet as mass medium. Journal of Communication, 46, 39-50.
40. Muhlenfeld, H.U. (2002). Mass communication as participation: Web-radio in Germany: Legal hazards and its contribution to an alternative way of mass communication. European Journal of Communication, 17, 103-113.
41. Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Knopf.
42. Qvortrup, L. (2006). Understanding new digital media. Medium theory or complexity theory ? European Journal of Communication, 21, 345-356.
43. Parmar, A. (2002). Global youth united. Marketing News, 1, 49.
44. Polat, R.K. (2005). The Internet and political participation: Exploring the explanatory links. European Journal of Communication, 20, 435-459.
45. Postmes, T., & Brunsting, S. (2002). Collective action in the age of Internet: Mass communication and online mobilization. Social Science Computer Review, 20, 290-301.
46. Postmes, T., Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1998). Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 25, 689-715.
47. Postmes, T., Spears, R., Sakhel, K., & de Groot, D. (2001). Social influence in computer-mediated communication: The effects of anonymity on group behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 1243-1254.
48. Rayner, P. (2006). A need for postmodern fluidity? Critical Studies in Media Communication, 23, 345-349.
49. Reicher, S.D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 161-198). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
50. Sassenberg, K. (2002). Common bond and common identity groups on the Internet: Attachment and normative behavior in on-topic and off-topic chats. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6, 27-37.
51. Slater, M.D., Snyder, L., & Hayes, A.F. (2006). Thinking and modeling at multiple levels: The potential contribution of multilevel modeling to communication theory and research. Human Communication Research, 32, 375-384.
52. Southwell, B.G. (2005). Between messages and people: A multilevel model of memory for television content. Communication Research, 32, 112-140.
53. Southwell, B.G., & Yzer, M.C. (2007). The roles of interpersonal communication in mass media campaigns. In C. Beck (Ed.), Communication yearbook 31 (pp. 419-462). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
54. Stalder, F. (1998). The network paradigm: Social formations in the age of information. The Information Society, 14, 301-308.
55. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
56. Tarde, G. (1903). The laws of imitation (E. W. C. Parsons, Trans.). New York: Henry Holt.
57. Turner, J., Hogg, M., Oakes, P., Reicher, S., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
58. Walther, J. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
59. Walther, J.B., Gay, G., & Hancock, J.T. (2005). How do communication and technology researchers study the Internet ? Journal of Communication, 55, 632-657.
60. Zimbardo, P.G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 17, 237-307.