We Are the Tea Party!: The Use of Facebook as an Online Political Forum for the Construction and Maintenance of in-Group Identification during the "GOTV" Weekend

Communication Quarterly

Volumn 62, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 115-133

  Morin, David T ^a   Flynn, Mark A ^b  

^a UTAH VALLEY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Department of Public Health   (United States)

Author keywords

Campaigns; New Media; Political Communication; Social Network

Indexed keywords

EID: 84893554444     PISSN: 01463373     EISSN: 17464102     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01463373.2013.861500     Document Type: Article

References (76)

1. Ancu, M., & Cozma, R. (2009). MySpace politics: Uses and gratifications of befriending candidates. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53 (4), 567 - 583.
2. Bagozzi, R. B., & Dholakia, U. M. (2006). Open source software user communities: A study of participation in linux user groups. Management Science, 52 (7), 1099 - 1115.
3. Baum, M. A., & Groeling, T. (2008). New media and polarization of American political discourse. Political Communication, 25, 345 - 365.
4. Becker, J. A. H., & Stamp, G. H. (2005). Impression management in chat rooms: A grounded theory model. Communication Studies, 56(3), 243-260.
5. Bessière, K., Fleming, S. A., & Kiesler, S. (2007). The ideal elf: Identity exploration in World of Warcraft. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10 (4), 530 - 535.
6. Bowers, J. W., Ochs, D. J., & Jensen, R. J. (1993). The rhetoric of agitation and control (), 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland.
7. Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13 (1), 210 - 230.
8. Brown, R. (2000). Social identity theory; Past achievements, current problems and future challenges. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 745 - 778.
9. Carnaghi, A., & Maass, A. (2007). In-group and out-group perspectives in the use of derogatory group labels: Gay versus Fag. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 26 (2), 142 - 156.
10. Code, J. R., & Zaparyniuk, N. E. (2009). Social identities, group formation, and the analysis of online communities. In S. Hatzipanagos & S. Warburton (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Social Software and Developing Community Ontologies (pp. 86 - 101). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference.
11. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research; Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13 (1), 3 - 21.
12. Cottle, S. (2011). Media and the Arab uprisings: Research notes. Journalism, 12 (5), 647 - 659.
13. Cress, U. (2005). Ambivalent effect of member portraits in virtual groups. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21 (4), 281 - 291.
14. Domke, D., & Coe, K. (2010). The God strategy: How religion became a political weapon in America. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Douglas, K. M., Craig, M., Bliuc, A., & Lala, G. (2005). Understanding Cyberhate: Social competition and social creativity in online white supremacist groups. Social Science Computer Review, 23 (1), 68 - 76.
16. Elliott, P. (2010, November 6) Complaints that Tea Party hurt GOP's Senate hopes. MSNBC.com. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40044181/ns/politics-decision_2010/
17. Facebook. (2012). Facebook Statistics. Retrieved from http://newsroom.fb.com/content/default.aspx?News AreaId=22
18. Fernandes, J., Giurcanu, M., Bowers, K. W., & Neely, J. C. (2010). The writing on the wall: A content analysis of college students' Facebook groups for the 2008 presidential election. Mass Communication and Society, 13, 653 - 675.
19. Fridkin, K. L., & Kenney, P. (2011). Variability in citizens' reactions to different types of negative campaigns. American Journal of Political Science, 55 (2), 307 - 325.
20. Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4 (3), 279 - 305.
21. Hanson, G., Haridakis, P. M., Cunningham, A. W. Sharma, R., & Ponder, J. D. (2010). The 2008 presidential campaign: Political cynicism in the age of Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube. Mass Communication & Society, 13 (5), 584 - 607.
22. Harpine, W. D. (2001). Bryan's "A cross of gold": The rhetoric of polarization at the 1896 Democratic convention. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 87, 291 - 304.
23. Himelboim, I., Gleave, E., & Smith, M. (2009). Discussion catalysts in online political discussions: Content importers and conversation starters. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 771 - 789.
24. Hoffner, C., & Rehkoff, R. A. (2011). Young voters' responses to the 2004 U.S. presidential election: Social identity, perceived media influence, and behavioral outcomes. Journal of Communication, 61 (4), 732 - 757.
25. Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self-categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16, 7 - 30.
26. Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58, 255 - 269.
27. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectively in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
28. Kahn, K. F., & Kenney, P. J. (2004). No holds barred: Negativity in U.S. Senate campaigns. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
29. Karasawa, M., Asai, N., & Tanabe, Y. (2007). Stereotypes as shared beliefs: Effects of group identity on dyadic conversations. Groups Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10 (4), 515 - 532.
30. Karpowitz, C. F., Monson, J. Q., Patterson, K. D., & Pope, J. C. (2011). Tea time in America? The impact of the Tea Party movement on the 2010 midterm elections. PS: Political Science and Politics, 44 (2), 303 - 309.
31. Kim, H., Zheng, J. R., & Gupta, S. (2011). Examining knowledge contribution from the perspective of an online identity in blogging communities. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1760 - 1770.
32. Knickerbocker, B. (2010, September 15). What is the "tea party" and how is it shaking up American politics. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Elections/2010/0915/What-is-the-tea-party-and-how-is-it-shaking-up-American-politics
33. Kobayashi, T., & Ikeda, K. (2009). Selective exposure in political web browsing. Information, Communication & Society, 12 (6), 929 - 953.
34. Martin, P. S. (2004). Inside the black box of negative campaign effects: Three reasons why negative campaigns mobilize. Political Psychology, 25 (4), 545 - 562.
35. Mascaro, C., Novak, A., & Goggins, S. (2012a). Emergent networks of topical discourse: A comparative framing and social network analysis of the Coffee Party and Tea Party Patriots groups on Facebook. In C. Reddick & S. Aikins (Eds.), Web 2.0 Technologies and Democratic Governance: Political, Policy and Management Implications (pp. 153 - 168). New York, NY: Springer.
36. Mascaro, C., Novak, A., & Goggins, S. (2012b). Shepherding and Censorship: Discourse Management in the Tea Party Patriots Facebook Group. Proceedings from Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (E-Government Track), Grand Wailea Maui, Hawaii.
37. McNamee, L. G., Peterson, B. L, Pena, J. (2010). A call to educate, participate, invoke and indict: Understanding the communication of online hate groups. Communication Monographs, 77 (2), 257 - 280.
38. Meyers, E. M. (2009). Tip of the iceberg: Meaning, identity, and literacy in preteen virtual worlds. Journal of Education for Library & Information Science, 50 (4), 226 - 236.
39. Michinov, N., Michinov, E., & Toczek-Capelle, M. (2004). Social identity, group processes, and performance in synchronous computer-mediated communication. Group Dynamics Theory, Research, and Practice, 8 (1), 27 - 39.
40. Min, Y. (2004). News coverage of negative political campaigns: An experiment of negative campaign effects on turnout and candidate election. Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 9 (4), 95 - 111.
41. Moscovici, S., & Zavalloni, M. (1969). The group as a polarizer of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 12 (2), 125 - 135.
42. Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 103 - 122.
43. Ning, K. S., Yu, A. Y., & Khalifa, M. (2010). Knowledge contribution in virtual communities: Accounting for multiple dimensions of social presence through social identity. Behaviour & Information Technology, 29 (4), 337 - 348.
44. Page, S., & Jagoda, N. (2010, July 8). What is the tea party? A growing state of mind. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/2010-07-01-tea-party_N.htm
45. Park, S., & Chung, N. (2011). Mediating roles of self-presentation desire in online game community commitment and trust behavior of massive multiplayer online role-playing games. Computers in Human Behavior, 27 (6), 2372 - 2379.
46. Pasek, J., More, E., & Romer, D. (2009). Realizing the social internet? Online social social network meets offline civic engagement. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 6 (3/4), 197 - 215.
47. Pempek, T. A., Yermolayeva, Y. A., & Calvert, S. L. (2009). College students' social network experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 30, 227 - 238.
48. Powell, L., Richmond, V. P., & Williams, G. C. (2011). Social network and political campaigns: Perceptions of candidates as interpersonal constructs. North American Journal of Psychology, 13(2), 331-342.
49. Qingwen, D., Toney, J., & Giblin, P. (2010). Social network dependency and intended political participation. Human Communication, 13 (1), 13 - 27.
50. Robertson, S. P., Vatrapu, R. K., & Medina, R. (2010). Off the wall political discourse: Facebook use in the 2008 U.S. presidential election. Information Polity, 15, 11 - 31.
51. Scheeners, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A. (2006). Diversity in ingroup bias: Structural factors, situational features, and social functions. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 90 (6), 944 - 960.
52. Scott, C. R. (2007). Communication and social identity theory: Existing and potential connections in organizational identification research. Communication Studies, 58 (2), 123 - 138.
53. Shen, K. N., Yu, A. Y., & Khalifa, M. (2010). Knowledge contribution in virtual communities: Accounting for multiple dimensions of social presence through social identity. Behavior & Information Technology, 29 (4), 337 - 348.
54. Smith, G. R. (2010). Politicians and the news media: How elite attacks influence perceptions of media bias. International Journal of Press/Politics, 15 (3), 319 - 343.
55. Spillius, A. (2010, September 15). What is the tea Party?: A beginner's guide to America's tea party organization. The Telegraph. Retrieved from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8005318/What-is-the-Tea-Party.html
56. Stalder, D. R. (2009). Political orientation, hostile media perceptions, and group-centrism. North American Journal of Psychology, 11 (2), 383 - 400.
57. Stewart, C. J., Smith, C. A., & Denton Jr., R. E. (2007). Persuasion and social organizations (), 5th ed. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.
58. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques (), 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
59. Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30, 341 - 366.
60. Stroud, N. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60 (3), 556 - 577.
61. Sweetser, K. D., & Lariscy, R. W. (2008). Candidates make good friends: An analysis of candidates' uses of Facebook. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 2 (3), 175 - 198.
62. Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
63. Tajfel, H. (1978). Differentiation between social groups. New York: Academic Press.
64. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
65. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1985). The social identity theory of group behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Volume 2 (pp. 7 - 24). Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press.
66. Trent, J. S., & Friedenberg, R. V. (2008). Political campaign communication: Principles & practices. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
67. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
68. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
69. Walther, J. B., Vander Heide, B., Kim, S., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends' appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34, 28 - 49.
70. Warner, B. R. (2010). Segmenting the electorate: The effects of exposure to political extremism online. Communication Studies, 16 (4), 430 - 444.
71. Warner, B. R., & Ryan, N. (2011). The polarizing influence of fragmented media: Lessons from Howard Dean. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 19 (4), 201 - 215.
72. Weiner, L. (2010, September 15). What is the tea party? A primer. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/09/what-is-the-tea-party-a-primer.html
73. Williams, C., & Gulati, G. J. (2007). Social Networks in Political Campaigns: Facebook and the 2006 Midterm Elections. Proceedings from 2007 American Political Science Association Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois.
74. Williams, C., & Gulati, G. J. (2008). What is a Social Network Worth? Facebook and Vote Share in the 2008 Presidential Primaries. Proceedings from American Political Science Association, Boston, Massachusetts.
75. Woolley, J. K., Limperos, A. M., & Oliver, M. B. (2010). The 2008 presidential election, 2.0: A content analysis of user-generated political Facebook groups. Mass Communication and Society, 13 (5), 631 - 652.
76. Zhang, W., Johnson, T. J., Seltzer, T., & Bichard, S. L. (2010). The revolution will be networked: The influence on social network sites on political attitudes and behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 28 (1), 75 - 92.