Managing political differences in social media

Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 1400-1408

  Grevet, Catherine ^a   Terveen, Loren ^b   Gilbert, Eric ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA   (United States)

Author keywords

Facebook; Homophily; Politics; Relationship management; Selfcensorship; Social media; Tie strength

Indexed keywords

BRIDGES; COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE); SURVEYS;

FACEBOOK; HOMOPHILY; POLITICS; RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT; SELFCENSORSHIP; SOCIAL MEDIA; TIE STRENGTHS;

SOCIAL SCIENCES;

EID: 84899016650     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2531602.2531676     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (34)

1. Adamic, L. and N. Glance, The Political Blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. Election: Divided They Blog. Proc. LinkKDD, 2005.
2. Baumer, E., Sinclair, J., and Tomlinson, B. "America Is Like Metamucil": Fostering Critical and Creative Thinking about Metaphor in Political Blogs. Proc. CHI, 2010. 1437-1446.
3. Bernard, H.R., Killworth, P., et al. The Problem of Informant Accuracy The Validity of Retrospective Data. Annual Review of Anthropology, 1984. 495-517.
4. Bishop, B., The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart. 2009. Mariner Books.
5. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2006. 3(2): p. 77-101.
6. Brzozowski, M., Hogg, T., and Szabo G. Friends and foes: Ideological social networking. Proc. CHI, 2008. 817-820.
7. Burke, M. and Kraut, R. Using Facebook After Losing a Job: Differential Benefits of Strong and Weak Ties. Proc. CSCW, 2013. 1419-1430.
8. Burke, M., Kraut, R., and Marlow, C. Social Capital on Facebook: Differentiating Uses and Users. Proc. CHI, 2011. 571-580.
9. Das, S., and Kramer, A. Self-Censorship on Facebook. Proc. ICWSM. 2013.
10. Doris-Down, A., Versee, H., and Gilbert, E. Political Blend: An Application Designed to Bring People Together Based on Political Differences. Proc. C&T, 2013.
11. Duggan, M. and Brenner, J. The Demographics of Social Media Users-2012. Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2013.
12. Garrett, R.K., Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2009. 14(2): p. 265-285.
13. Gilbert, E., Blogs Are Echo Chambers: Blogs Are Echo Chambers. Proc. HICSS. 2008.
14. Gilbert, E. and Karahalios, K. Predicting tie strength with social media. Proc. CHI, 2009. 211-220.
15. Goel, S., Mason, W., and Watts, D.J. Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2010. 99(4) 611-621.
16. Granovetter, M.S., The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 1973. 78(6) 1360-1380.
17. Hampton, K., Sessions Goulet, L., et al. Social networking sites and our lives. Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2011.
18. Hemphill, L., Otterbacher, J., and Shapiro, M. What's Congress Doing on Twitter? Proc. CSCW, 2013. 877-886.
19. Kriplean, T., Morgan, J., et al. Supporting Reflective Public Thought with considerate. Proc. CSCW, 2012. 265-274.
20. Marsden, P.V., Core Discussion Networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 1987. 52(1) 122-131.
21. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L. and Cook, J.M. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual review of sociology, 2001. 415-444.
22. Munson, S. and Resnick, P. Presenting Diverse Political Opinions: How and How Much. Proc. CHI. 2010. 1457-1466.
23. Munson, S. and Resnick, P. The Prevalence of Political Discourse in Non-Political Blogs. Proc. ICWSM, 2011.
24. Putnam, R.D. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. Simon &Schuster, New York. 2000.
25. Rainie, L. and Smith, A. Social networking sites and politics. Pew Internet and the American Life Project, 2012.
26. Rainie, L., Smith, A., et al., Social Media and Political Engagement. Pew Internet and the American Life Project, 2012.
27. Roback, A. and Hemphill, L. "I'd have to vote against you": Issue Campaigning via Twitter. CSCW Extended Abstracts, 2013. 259-262.
28. Sleeper, M., Balebako, R., et al. The Post that Wasn't: Exploring Self-Censorship on Facebook. Proc. CSCW, 2013. 793-802.
29. Stutzman, F., Gross, R. and Acquisti, A. Silent Listeners: The Evolution of Privacy and Disclosure on Facebook. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality, 2013.
30. Sukumaran, A., Vezich, S., et al. Normative Influences on Thoughtful Online Participation. Proc. CHI, 2011. 3401-3410.
31. Sunstein, C. The Law of Group Polarization. Journal of Political Philosophy, 2002.
32. Sunstein, C. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press, 2009.
33. Wimmer, A. and Lewis, K. Beyond and below racial homophily: ERG models of a friendship network documented on Facebook. American Journal of Sociology, 2010. (116) 583-642.
34. Zhao, C., Hinds, P. and Gao, G. How and To Whom People Share: The Role of Culture in Self-Disclosure in Online Communities. Proc. CSCW, 2012. 67-76