Perceived Speech Conditions and Disagreement of Everyday Talk: A Proceduralist Perspective of Citizen Deliberation

Communication Theory

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 124-145

  Zhang, Weiyu ^a   Chang, Leanne ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; PERCEPTION; POLITICAL SYSTEM;

EID: 84897943645     PISSN: 10503293     EISSN: 14682885     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/comt.12034     Document Type: Article

References (86)

1. American Association for Public Opinion Research (2009). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Lenexa, KS: AAPOR.
2. Balch, G. I. (1974). Multiple indicators in survey research: The concept of "sense of political efficacy". Political Methodology, 1, 1-43.
3. Barabas, J. (2004). How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98, 687-701. doi:10.1017/S0003055404041425.
4. Black, L. W. (2008). Deliberation, storytelling, and dialogic moments. Communication Theory, 18, 93-116. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00315.x.
5. Bryan, F. M. (2004). Real democracy: The New England town meeting and how it works. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
6. Burkhalter, S., Gastil, J., & Kelshaw, T. (2002). A conceptual definition and theoretical model of pubic deliberation in small face-to-face groups. Communication Theory, 12(4), 398-422. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00276.x.
7. Campbell, A., Gurin, G., & Miller, W. E. (1954). The voter decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
8. Chamberlain, A. (2012). A time-series analysis of external efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(1), 117-130. doi:10.1093/poq/nfr064.
9. Chang, L., & Jacobson, T. (2010). Measuring participation as communicative action: A case study of citizen involvement and assessment of a city's smoking cessation policy-making process. Journal of Communication, 60, 660-679. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01508.x.
10. Chang, L., Jacobson, T., & Zhang, W. (2013). A communicative action approach to evaluating citizen support for a government's smoking policies. Journal of Communication, 63(6), 1153-1174. doi:10.1111/jcom.12065
11. Cohen, J. (1997). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (pp. 67-91). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Cohen, J. (1998). Democracy and liberty. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 185-231). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13. Converse, P. E. (1972). Change in the American electorate. In A. Campbell & P. E. Converse (Eds.), The human meaning of social change (pp. 263-337). New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
14. Craig, S. C., Niemi, R. G., & Silver, G. E. (1990). Political efficacy and trust: A report on the NES pilot study items. Political Behavior, 12(3), 289-314. doi:10.1007/BF00992337.
15. Dardis, F. E., Shen, F., & Edwards, H. H. (2008). Effects of negative political advertising on individuals' cynicism and self-efficacy: The impact of ad type and message exposures. Mass Communication & Society, 11, 24-42. doi:10.1080/15205430701582512.
16. Department of Statistics. (2011). Census of population 2010 statistical release 1: Demographic characteristics, education, language and religion. Retrieved from http://www.singstat.gov.sg/pubn/popn/c2010acr.html
17. Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
18. Dryzek, J. S. (2009). Democratization as deliberative capacity building. Comparative Political Sciences, 42(11), 1379-1402. doi:10.1177/0010414009332129.
19. Eveland, W. P., & Thomson, T. (2006). Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 523-542. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00299.x.
20. Fearon, J. D. (1998). Deliberation as discussion. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 44-68). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
21. Feldmen, L., & Price, V. (2008). Confusion or enlightenment?: How exposure to disagreement moderates the effects of political discussion and media use on candidate knowledge. Communication Research, 35(1), 61-87. doi:10.1177/0093650207309362.
22. Felski, R. (1989). Beyond feminist aesthetics: Feminist literature and social change. Cambridge, England: Harvard University Press.
23. Fishkin, J. S. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
24. Fishkin, J. S. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
25. Fishkin, J., & Luskin, R. (1999). Bringing deliberation to the democratic dialogue. In M. McCombs & A. Reynolds (Eds.), A poll with a human face: The national issues convention experiment in political communication (pp. 3-38). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Gastil, J. (2000). By popular demand: Revitalizing representative democracy through deliberative elections. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
27. Gastil, J. (2008). Political communication and deliberation. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
28. Gastil, J., & Black, L. W. (2008). Public deliberation as the organizing principle of political communication research. Journal of Public Deliberation, 4(1). Retrieved from http://www.publicdeliberation.net/jpd/vol4/iss1/art3/
29. Gastil, J., & Dillard, J. P. (1999). Increasing political sophistication through public deliberation. Political Communication, 16, 3-23. doi:10.1080/105846099198749.
30. Gastil, J., & Levine, P. (2005). The deliberative democracy handbook: Strategies for effective civic engagement in the twenty-first century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.
31. Gastil, J., Deess, E. P., Weiser, P., & Simmons, C. (2010). The jury and democracy: How jury deliberation promotes civic engagement and political participation. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
32. Goodin, R. E. (2005). Sequencing deliberative moments. Acta Politica, 40, 182-196. doi:10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500098.
33. Goodin, R. E., & Dryzek, J. S. (2006). Deliberative impacts: The macro-political uptake of mini-publics. Politics & Society, 34(2), 219-244. doi:10.1177/0032329206288152.
34. Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. (2000). Democracy and disagreement: Why moral conflicts cannot be avoided in politics, and what should be done about it. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
35. Habermas, J. (1979). Communication and the evolution of society. Boston, MA: Beacon.
36. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action, Vol. 1: Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
37. Habermas, J. (1990). Moral consciousness and communicative action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
38. Hauser, G. A. (2001). Prisoners of conscience and the counterpublic sphere of prison writing: The stones that start the avalanche. In R. Asen & D. C. Brouwer (Eds.), Counterpublics and the state (pp. 35-58). Albany: State University of New York Press.
39. He, B., & Warren, M. E. (2011). Authoritarian deliberation: The deliberative turn in Chinese political development. Perspectives on Politics, 9(2), 269-289. doi:10.1017/S1537592711000892.
40. Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2004a). Political disagreement: The survival of diverse opinions within communication networks. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
41. Huckfeldt, R., Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2004b). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25, 65-95. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00357.x.
42. Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 50(2), 173-192. doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem5002_1.
43. Kim, J., & Kim, E. J. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18, 51-70. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x.
44. Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication, 16, 361-385. doi:10.1080/105846099198541.
45. Kwak, N., Williams, A. E., Wang, X., & Lee, H. (2005). Talking politics and engaging politics: An examination of the interactive relationships between structural features of political talk and discussion engagement. Communication Research, 32, 87-111. doi:10.1177/0093650204271400.
46. Lalljee, M., & Evans, G. (1998). Political talk and the stability and consistency of political orientation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 203-212. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1998.tb01165.x.
47. Lee, F. L. F. (2009). The impact of political discussion in a democratizing society: The moderating role of disagreement and support for democracy. Communication Research, 36(3), 379-399. doi:10.1177/0093650209333027.
48. Luskin, R. C. (1987). Measuring political sophistication. American Political Science Review, 31, 856-899. doi:10.2307/2111227.
49. Luskin, R. C., Fishkin, J. S., & Jowell, R. (2002). Considered opinions: Deliberative polling in Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 32, 455-488. doi:10.1017/S0007123402000194.
50. Maia, R. C. M. (2012). Deliberation, the media, and political talk. New York, NY: Hampton Press.
51. Mansbridge, J. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics: Essays on democracy and disagreement (pp. 211-242). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
52. Marques, A. C. S., & Maia, R. C. M. (2010). Everyday conversation in the deliberative process: An analysis of communicative exchanges in discussion groups and their contributions to civic and political socialization. Journal of Communication, 60(4), 611-635. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01506.x.
53. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., & Moy, P. (1999a). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication, 16(3), 315-336. doi:10.1080/105846099198659.
54. McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., Moy, P., Horowitz, E. M., Holbert, R. L., Zhang, W., .. Zubric, J. (1999b). Understanding deliberation: The effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research, 26, 743-774. doi:10.1177/009365099026006005.
55. Merton, R. K. (1954). Social theory and social structure. New York, NY: Free Press.
56. Ministry of Health. (2010). Smoking (Control of Advertisements and Sale of Tobacco) Act. Retrieved from http://sgms.internet.gov.sg
57. Morell, M. E. (2003). Survey and experimental evidence for a reliable and valid measure of internal political efficacy. Public Opinion Quarterly, 67, 989-1001. doi:10.1086/378965.
58. Mutz, D. C. (2002). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 838-855. doi:10.2307/3088437.
59. Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
60. Mutz, D. C. (2008). Is deliberative democracy a falsifiable theory? Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 521-538. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070308.
61. Negt, O., & Kluge, A. (1993). Public sphere and experience: Toward an analysis of the Bourgeois and Proletarian public sphere. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
62. Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407-1413. doi:10.2307/1963953.
63. Pinkleton, B. E., & Austin, E. W. (2002). Exploring relationships among media use frequency, perceived media importance, and media satisfaction in political disaffection and efficacy. Mass Communication & Society, 5(2), 141-163. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0502_3.
64. Polletta, F., & Lee, J. (2006). Is telling stories good for democracy? Rhetoric in public deliberation after 9/11. American Sociological Review, 71(5), 699-723. doi:10.1177/000312240607100501.
65. Price, V., Cappella, J., & Nir, L. (2002). Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communication, 19, 95-112. doi:10.1080/105846002317246506.
66. Rinke, E. M., Wessler, H., Lob, C., & Weinmann, C. (2013). Deliberative qualities of generic news frames: Assessing the democratic value of strategic game and contestation framing in election campaign coverage. Political Communication, 30(3), 474-494. doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.737432.
67. Rodan, G. (2004). Transparency and authoritarian rule in Southeast Asia. London, England: RoutlegeCurzon.
68. Sanders, L. M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25(3), 347-364. doi:10.1177/0090591797025003002.
69. Scheufele, D. A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29(1), 46-65. doi:10.1177/009365020202900103.
70. Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., Brossard, D., & Nisbet, E. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21, 315-338. doi:10.1080/10584600490481389.
71. Singapore Election Department. (2012). Who can vote? Retrieved from http://www.eld.gov.sg/voters.html
72. Squires, C. R. (2001). The black press and the state: Attracting unwanted(?) attention. In R. Asen & D. C. Brouwer (Eds.), Counterpublics and the state (pp. 111-136). Albany: State University of New York Press.
73. Tamney, J. B. (1996). The struggle over Singapore's soul: Western modernization and Asian culture. Berlin, Germany: Walter de Gruyter.
74. Thompson, D. F. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497-520. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.11.081306.070555.
75. Verba, S., Nie, N. H., & Kim, J. (1978). Participation and political equality: A seven-nation comparison. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
76. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
77. Walsh, K. C. (2003). Talking about politics: Informal groups and social identity in American life. Chicago, IL: University Chicago Press.
78. Wojcieszak, M., & Price, V. (2010). What underlies the false consensus effect? How personal opinion and disagreement affect perception of public opinion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 21(1), 25-46. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edp001.
79. Young, I. M. (1996). Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political (pp. 120-136). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
80. Young, I. M. (2002). Difference as a resource for democratic communication. In J. Bohman & W. Rehg (Eds.), Deliberative democracy: Essays on reason and politics (pp. 383-406). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
81. Zimmerman, J. F. (1999). The New England town meeting: Democracy in action. Westport, CT: Praeger.
82. Zhang, W. (2006). Constructing and disseminating subaltern public discourses in China. Javnost-The Public, 13(2), 41-64.
83. Zhang, W. (2010). Technical capital and participatory inequality in eDeliberation: An actor-network analysis. Information, Communication & Society, 13(7), 1019-1039. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2010.495988
84. Zhang, W. (2012). The effects of political news use, political discussion and authoritarian orientation on political participation: Evidences from Singapore and Taiwan. Asian Journal of Communication, 22(5), 474-492. doi: 10.1080/01292986.2012.701313
85. Zhang, W. (2013). Redefining youth activism through digital technology in Singapore. International Communication Gazette, 75(3), 253-270. doi: 10.1177/1748048512472858
86. Zhang, W., Cao, X., & Trah, M. N. (2013). The structural features and the deliberative quality of online discussions. Telematics & Informatics, 30(2), 74-86. doi: 10.1016/j.tele.2012.06.001