Encountering "Difference" in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks

Journal of Communication

Volumn 60, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 680-700

  Brundidge, Jennifer ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERNET; MEDIA ROLE; POLITICAL PARTICIPATION; PUBLIC ACCESS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; THEORETICAL STUDY;

EID: 78149337597     PISSN: 00219916     EISSN: 14602466     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.x     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Agresti, A., & Agresti, B. (1977). Statistical analysis of qualitative variation. Sociological Methodology, 9, 204-237.
2. Alesina, A., Develeeschauwer, A., Easterly, W., Kurlat, S., & Wacziag, R. (2003). Fractionalization. Journal of Economic Growth, 8(2), 155-194.
3. Arendt, H. (1968). Between past and future: Eight exercises in political thought. New York: Viking.
4. Barber, B. R., Mattson, K., & Peterson, J. (1997). The state of 'electronically enhanced democracy': A survey of the Internet. New Brunswick, NJ: Walt Whitman Center.
5. Bimber, B., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. New York: Oxford University.
6. Blau, P. M. (1977). Inequality and heterogeneity: A primitive theory of social structure. New York: Free Press.
7. Blum, T. C. (1984). Racial inequality and salience: An examination of Blau's theory of social structure. Social Forces, 62, 607-617.
8. Boase, J., Horrigan, J. B., Wellman, B., & Rainie, L. (2006). The strength of ties. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved from
9. Brundidge, J. (2010). Political discussion and news use in the contemporary public sphere: The "accessibility" and "traversability" of the Internet. Javnost-The Public, 17, 63-82.
10. Brundidge, J. (in press). Toward a theory of citizen interface with political discussion and news in the contemporary public sphere. International Journal of Communication.
11. Cappella, J. N., Price, V., & Nir, L. (2002). Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: Electronic dialogue during campaign 2000. Political Communication, 19, 73-93.
12. Cornfield, M. (2005). The Internet and campaign 2004. Washington, DC. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved from
13. Dahlberg, L. (2001). Computer-mediated communication and the public sphere: A critical analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(1).
14. Dahlgren, P. (2001). The public sphere and the net: structure, space, and communication. In W. L. Bennett & R. M. Entman (Eds.), Mediated politics: Communication in the future of democracy (pp. 33-55). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University.
15. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147-162.
16. Durkheim, E. (1974). On anomie. In W. E. Connolly & G. Gordon (Eds.), Social structure and political theory(pp. 75-96). Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
17. Easterly, W., & Levine, R. (1997). Africa's growth tragedy: Policies and ethnic divisions. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 1203-1250.
18. Fallows, D. (2002). Email at work. Washington, DC: Pew internet and American Life Project. Retrieved from
19. Feld, S. (1984). The structured use of personal associates. Social Forces, 62, 640-652.
20. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
21. Frey, D. (1986). Recent research on selective exposure to information. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 41-80). San Diego, CA: Academic.
22. Galston, W. A. (2002). If political fragmentation is the problem, is the Internet the solution? In D. M. Anderson, M. Cornfield & F. C. Arterton (Eds.), The civic web: Online politics and democratic values (pp. 35-44). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
23. Garrett, K. R. (2005). Exposure to controversy in an information society. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan.
24. Garrett, R. K. (2009). Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 14, 26-285.
25. Gastil, J., Black, L., & Moscovitz, K. (2008). Ideology, attitude change, and deliberation in small face to face groups. Political Communication, 25, 23-46.
26. Graber, D. A. (1984). Processing the news: How people tame the information tide. New York: Longman.
27. Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 6, 1360-1380.
28. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
29. Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16, 411-426.
30. Horrigan, J., Garrett, K., & Resnick, P. (2004). The Internet and democratic debate. Retrieved from
31. Howard, P. N. (2005). Deep democracy, thin citizenship: The impact of digital media in political campaign strategy. ANNALS, AAPSS, 597 (January), 153-170.
32. Huckfeldt, R. (2007). Unanimity, discord, and the communication of public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 51, 978-995.
33. Huckfeldt, R., Beck, P., Dalton, R., & Levine, J. (1995). Political environments cohesive social groups, and the communication of public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 39, 1025-1054.
34. Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2004). Political disagreement: The survival of diverse opinions within communication networks. New York: Cambridge University.
35. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
36. Jennings, M. K., & Zeitner, V. (2003). Internet use and civic engagement: A longitudinal analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 311-334.
37. Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement and interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Kinder, D. R. (2003). Communication and politics in the age of information. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 357-393). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
39. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way: selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counter-attitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36, 426-448.
40. London, S. (1993). Electronic democracy. Dayton, OH: Kettering Foundation.
41. MacKuen, M. (1990). Speaking of politics: Individual conversational choice, public opinion, and the prospects for deliberative democracy. In J. Ferejhon & J. Kuklinski (Eds.), Information and democratic process (pp. 59-99). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois.
42. Mauro, P. (1995). Corruption and growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 681-712.
43. McLeod, J. M., & Becker, L. B. (1974). Testing the validity of gratification measures through political effects analysis. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communication: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 137-164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
44. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16, 315-336.
45. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., Moy, P., Horowitz, E. M., Holbert, R. L., Zhang, W., et al. (1999). Understanding deliberation: The effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research, 26, 623-654.
46. McLeod, J., Sotirovic, M., & Holbert, R. L. (1998). Values as sociotropic judgments influencing communications patterns. Communication Research, 25(3), 453-485.
47. Mill, J. S. (1859/1998). On liberty and other essays. New York: Oxford University Press.
48. Mueller, J. H., Schuessler, K. F., & Costner, H. L. (1977). Statistical reasoning in sociology (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
49. Mutz, D. C. (2002). Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. American Political Science Review, 96, 111-126.
50. Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. New York: Cambridge University.
51. Mutz, D. C., & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference. The American Political Science Review, 95, 97-114.
52. Neuman, R. W. (1991). The future of the mass audience. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University.
53. Noelle-Neumann, E. (1986). The spiral of silence: Public opinion-our social skin. Chicago: University of Chicago.
54. Page, B. L. (1996). Who deliberates? Mass media in modern democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago.
55. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
56. Price, V., & Cappella, J. N. (2002). Online deliberation and its influence: The electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000. IT & Society, 1(1), 303-329.
57. Price, V., Cappella, J. N., & Nir, L. (2002). Does more disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communication, 19, 95-112.
58. Price, V., & Tewksbury, D. (1997). News values and public opinion: A theoretical account of media priming. In G. Barnett & F. J. Boster (Eds.), Progress in the communication sciences (Vol. 13, pp. 173-212). Greenwich, U.K.: Ablex.
59. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon and Schuster.
60. Rhine, R. J. (1967). The 1964 presidential election and curves of information seeking and avoiding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 5, 416-423.
61. Scheufele, D. A., Hardy, B. W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56, 728-753.
62. Scheufele, D. A., Nisbit, M. C., Brossard, D., & Nisbit, E. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impact of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21, 315-338.
63. Sears, D. O., & Freedman, J. L. (1967). Selective exposure to information: A critical review. Public Opinion Quarterly, 31, 194-213.
64. Shah, D., Cho, J., Eveland, W. P., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age. Communication Research, 32, 531-565.
65. Stromer-Galley, J. (2002). New voices in the public sphere: A comparative analysis of interpersonal and online political talk. Javnost: The Public, 9(2), 23-42.
66. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341-366.
67. Sunstein, C. (2001) Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.
68. Valentino, N. A., Hutchings, V. L., Banks, A. J., & Davis, A. K. (2008). Is a worried citizen a good citizen? Emotions, political information seeking, and learning via the Internet. Political Psychology, 29, 247-273.
69. Verbrugge, L. M. (1977). The structure of adult friendship choices. Social Forces, 56, 576-597.
70. Wojcieszak, M., & Mutz, D. (2009). Online groups and political deliberation: Does the Internet facilitate exposure to disagreement? Journal of Communication, 59, 40-56.
71. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. New York: Cambridge University.