Mobile communication and strong network ties: Shrinking or expanding spheres of public discourse?

New Media and Society

Volumn 14, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 262-280

  Campbell, Scott W ^a   Kwak, Nojin ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

Author keywords

cell phone; discussion networks; like minded; mobile communication; mobile phone; network size; political discussion; public discourse; social networks; strong ties

Indexed keywords

EID: 84858652086     PISSN: 14614448     EISSN: 14617315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1461444811411676     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Aleo-CarreiraC (2008) Did social media decide the U.S.presidential election in Obama's favor?The Industry Standard, November6.Available at: http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/153405/did_social_media_decide_us_presidential_electron.html.
2. AT& T (2008) AT&T reports largest text messaging spike in company history on election night, November6.Available at: http://www.att.com/gen/press-room?pid=4800&cdvn=news&newsarticleid=26287.
3. Bellah RN,Madsen R,Sullivan WM,Swidler A,Tipton SMHabits of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life.Berkeley: University of California Press; 1985:.
4. Bennett SE,Flickinger RS,Rhine SL.Political talk over here, over there, over time.British Journal of Political Science.2000;30 (1): 99-119.
5. Boulianne S.Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research.Political Communication.2009;26 (2): 193-211.
6. Burt RS.Network items and the general social survey.Social Networks.1984;6 (4): 293-339.
7. Campbell SW,Kwak N.Mobile communication and civic life: Linking patterns of use to civic and political engagement.Journal of Communication.2010a;60 (3): 536-555.
8. Campbell SW,Kwak N.Mobile communication and social capital: An analysis of geographically differentiated usage patterns.New Media & Society.2010b;12 (3): 435-451.
9. Campbell SW,Kwak N.Political life in 'mobilized' society: The interactive relationships among mobile communication, network characteristics, and political participation.Journal of Communication.:.
10. Campbell SW,Ling RSMedia Effects: Advances in Theory and Research.2008) Effects of mobile media.In: BryantJOliverM (eds) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (3rd edn).Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 592-606.Bryant JOliver M, ed.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2008:592-606.
11. Cronbach LJ.Statistical tests for moderator variables: Flaws in analyses recently proposed.Psychological Bulletin.1987;102 (3): 414-417.
12. Delli Carpini MX,Cook FL,Jacobs LR.Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature.Annual Review of Political Science.2004;7 (1): 315-344.
13. Eveland WP.The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation and elaboration.Political Communication.2004;21 (2): 177-193.
14. Eveland WP,Hively MH.Political discussion frequency, network size, and 'heterogeneity' of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation.Journal of Communication.2009;59 (2): 205-224.
15. Eveland WP,Thomson T.Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge.Journal of Communication.2006;56 (3): 523-542.
16. Finkel SECausal Analysis with Panel Data.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1995:.
17. Fischer CS.Bowling alone: What's the score?.Social Networks.2005;27 (2): 155-167.
18. Gastil J,Dillard JP.Increasing political sophistication through public deliberation.Political Communication.1999;16 (1): 3-23.
19. Gastil J,Deess EP,Weiser P.Civic awakening in the jury room: A test of the connection between jury deliberation and political participation.Journal of Politics.2002;64 (2): 585-595.
20. Gergen KJ.Self and community in the new floating worlds.Mobile Democracy: Essays on Society, Self, and Politics.Nyiri K, ed.Vienna: Passagen Verlag; 2003:103-114.
21. Gergen KJ.Mobile communication and the transformation of the democratic process.Handbook of Mobile Communication Studies.Katz J, ed.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2008:297-310.
22. Granovetter M.The strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology.1973;78 (6): 1360-1380.
23. Habuchi I.Accelerating reflexivity.Personal, Portable, Pedestrian: Mobile Phones in Japanese Life.Ito MOkabe DMatsuda M, ed.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005:165-182.
24. Holbert RL,Benoit WL,Hansen GJ,Wen W-C.The role of communication in the formation of an issue-based citizenry.Communication Monographs.2002;69 (4): 296-310.
25. Huckfeldt R,Mendez JM,Osborn T.Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks.Political Psychology.2004;25 (1): 65-95.
26. Ishii K.Implications of mobility: The uses of personal communication media in everyday life.Journal of Communication.2006;56 (2): 346-365.
27. Jaccard J,Turrisi R,Wan CKInteraction Effects in Multiple Regression.Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990:.
28. Jeffres LW,Atkin D,Neuendorf KA.A model linking community activity and communication with political attitudes and involvement in neighborhoods.Political Communication.2002;19 (4): 387-421.
29. Jennings MK,Zeitner V.Internet use and civic engagement: A longitudinal analysis.Public Opinion Quarterly.2003;67 (3): 311-334.
30. Katz E.Introduction: The state of the art.Public Opinion and the Communication of Consent.Glasser TLSalmon CT, ed.New York: Guilford; 1994:xiv-xxxiv.
31. Katz JE,Aakhus MA.Conclusion: Making meaning of mobiles - a theory of Apparatgeist.Perpetual Contact: Mobile Communication, Private Talk, Public Performance.Katz JEAakhus MA, ed.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2002:301-320.
32. Kraut RE,Patterson M,Lundmark V,Kiesler S,Mukhopadhyay T,Scherlis W.Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?.American Psychologist.1998;53 (9): 1017-1032.
33. Kraut RE,Kiesler S,Boneva B,Cummings J,Helgeson V,Crawford A.Internet paradox revisited.Journal of Social Issues.2002;58 (1): 49-74.
34. Kwak N.Revisiting the knowledge gap hypothesis: Education, motivation, and media use.Communication Research.1999;26 (4): 385-413.
35. Kwak N,Williams A,Wang X,Lee H.Talking politics and engaging politics: An examination of the interactive relationships between structural features of political talk and discussion engagement.Communication Research.2005;32 (1): 87-111.
36. Leighley JA.Social interaction and contextual influences on participation.American Politics Quarterly.1990;18 (4): 459-475.
37. Lenart SShaping Political Attitudes: The Impact of Interpersonal Communication and Mass Media.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1994:.
38. Ling RThe Mobile Connection: The Cell Phone's Impact on Society.San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufman Publishers; 2004:.
39. Ling RNew Tech, New Ties: How Mobile Communication is Reshaping Social Cohesion.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2008:.
40. McLeod JM,Scheufele DA,Moy P.Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation.Political Communication.1999;16 (3): 315-336.
41. McPherson M,Smith-Lovin L,Brashears M.Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks over two decades.American Sociological Review.2006;71 (3): 353-375.
42. Moy P,Gastil J.Predicting deliberative communication: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions.Political Communication.2006;23 (4): 443-460.
43. Mutz DC.Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice.American Political Science Review.2002a;96 (1): 111-126.
44. Mutz DC.The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation.American Journal of Political Science.2002b;46 (4): 838-855.
45. Mutz DCHearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2006:.
46. Mutz DC,Mondak JJ.The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse.Journal of Politics.2006;68 (1): 140-155.
47. Nie NH,Erbring L.Internet and society: A preliminary report.IT & Society.2002;1 (1): 275-283.
48. Nie NH,Hillygus SD.The impact of Internet use on sociability: Time-diary findings.IT & Society.2002;1 (1): 1-20.
49. Norris P.Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam.PS: Political Science and Politics.1996;29 (3): 474-480.
50. Pan Z,Shen L,Paek H-J,Sun Y.Mobilizing political talk in a presidential campaign: An examination of campaign effects in a deliberative framework.Communication Research.2006;33 (5): 315-345.
51. Putnam RD.Bowling alone: America's declining social capital.Journal of Democracy.1995;6 (1): 65-78.
52. Putnam RDBowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community.New York: Simon & Schuster; 2000:.
53. Putnam RD,Yonish S.How important are random samples? Some surprising new evidence.Paper presented to the annual meeting of the American Association of Public Opinion Research; 1999St Petersburg, FL; 1999.
54. Scheufele DA.Talk or conversation? Dimensions of interpersonal discussion and their implications for participatory democracy.Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly.2000;77 (4): 727-743.
55. Scheufele DA.Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior.Communication Research.2002;29 (1): 46-65.
56. Scheufele DA,Shanahan J,Kim S.Who cares about local politics? Media influences on local political involvement, issue awareness, and attitude strength.Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly.2002;79 (2): 427-444.
57. Sennett RThe Fall of Public Man.New York: Norton; 1974:.
58. Shah DV,Kwak N,Holbert RL.'Connecting' and 'disconnecting' with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital.Political Communication.2001;18 (2): 141-162.
59. Shah DV,McLeod JM,Yoon SH.Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences.Communication Research.2001;28 (4): 464-506.
60. Shah DV,Cho J,Eveland WP,Kwak N.Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling internet effects on civic participation.Communication Research.2005;32 (5): 531-565.
61. Sunstein CRepublic.com.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2001:.
62. Valkenberg PM,Peter J.Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: A decade of research.Current Directions in Psychological Science.2009;18 (1): 1-5.
63. Verba S,Schlozman KL,Brady HVoice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1995:.
64. WellmanBQuan-HaaseABoaseJChenWHamptonKde DiazIIMiyataK (2003) The social affordances of the Internet for networked individualism.Journal of Computer-mediated Communication, 8(3) (accessed 18 March 2011) http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue3/wellman.html.
65. Wyatt RO,Katz E,Kim J.Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in public and private spaces.Journal of Communication.2000;50 (1): 71-92.