Political persuasion on social media: Tracing direct and indirect effects of news use and social interaction

New Media and Society

Volumn 18, Issue 9, 2016, Pages 1875-1895

  Diehl, Trevor ^a   Weeks, Brian E ^b   Gil de Zúñiga, Homero ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^c UNIVERSIDAD DIEGO PORTALES   (Chile)

Author keywords

Deliberative democracy; discussion; network heterogeneity; news; persuasion; political participation; selective exposure; social interaction; social media

Indexed keywords

EID: 84987811219     PISSN: 14614448     EISSN: 14617315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1461444815616224     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. American Association of Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) (2011) Standard definitions: final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys. Available at: http://aapor.org/Content/NavigationMenu/AboutAAPOR/StandardsampEthics/StandardDefinitions/StandardDefinitions2011.pdf
2. D.BarkerA.B.Lawrence (2006) Media favoritism and presidential nominations: reviving the direct effects model. Political Communication23(1): 41–59.
3. H.BisginN.AgarwalX.Xu (2012) A study of homophily on social media. World Wide Web15(2): 213–232.
4. A.Blais (2000) To vote or not to vote?: The merits and limits of rational choice theory. Pittsburg, CA: University of Pittsburgh.
5. L.BodeE.K.VragaP.Borah. (2013) A new space for political behavior: political social networking and its democratic consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication19(30): 414–429.
6. R.M.BondC.J.FarissJ.J.Jones. (2012) A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature489: 295–298.
7. J.Brundidge (2010) Encountering “difference” in the contemporary public sphere: the contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Journal of Communication60(4): 680–700.
8. J.BrundidgeK.GarretH.Rojas. (2014) Political participation and ideological news online: “differential gains” and “differential losses” in a presidential election cycle. Mass Communication and Society17(4): 464–486.
9. D.Centola (2010) The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science329: 1194–1197.
10. R.B.CialdiniM.R.Trost (1998) Social influence: social norms, conformity and compliance. In: (eds) The Handbook of Social Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp.151–192.
11. M.Delli CarpiniS.Keeter (1996) What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
12. J.DonathD.boyd (2004) Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal22(4): 71–82.
13. A.H.EaglyS.Chaiken (1993) The Psychology of Attitudes. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
14. W.P.EvelandM.J.HutchensA.C.Morey (2013) Political network Size and its antecedents and consequences. Political Communication30(2): 371–394.
15. L.Feldman (2011) The opinion factor: the effects of opinionated news on information processing and attitude change. Political Communication28(2): 163–181.
16. L.FeldmanE.W.MaibachC.Roser-Renouf. (2011) Climate on cable: the nature and impact of global warming coverage on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. The International Journal of Press/Politics17(1): 3–31.
17. J.S.Fishkin (1991) Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform, vol. 217. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18. K.GarrettN.Stroud (2014) Partisan paths to exposure diversity. Journal of Communication64(4): 680–701.
19. J.Gastil (1993) Democracy in Small Groups: Participation, Decision Making, and Communication. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.
20. A.S.GerberP.G.DonaldW.L.Christopher (2008) Social pressure and voter turnout: evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review102(1): 33–48.
21. H.Gil de Zúñiga (2002) Internet inherentemente personal: cómo su uso influencia nuestras vidas. Binaria3: 1–45.
22. H.Gil de ZúñigaS.Valenzuela (2011) The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: online and offline networks, weak ties and civic engagement. Communication Research38(3): 397–421.
23. H.Gil de ZúñigaI.BachmannS.H.Hsu. (2013) Expressive vs. consumptive blog use: implications for interpersonal discussion and political participation. International Journal of Communication7: 1538–1559.
24. H.Gil de ZúñigaT.CorreaS.Valenzuela (2012) Selective exposure to cable news and immigration in the U.S.: the relationship between FOX News, CNN, and attitudes toward Mexican immigrants. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media56(4): 597–615.
25. H.Gil de ZúñigaL.MolyneuxP.Zheng (2014) Social media, political expression, and political participation: panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication64(4): 612–634.
26. A.Hayes (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Processes: A Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
27. R.L.HolbertB.E.WeeksS.Esralew (2013) Approaching the 2012 US presidential election from a diversity of explanatory principles understanding, consistency, and hedonism. American Behavioral Scientist57(12): 1663–1687.
28. R.HuckfeldtP.E.JohnsonJ.Sprague (2004a) Political Disagreement: The Survival of Diverse Opinions Within Communication Networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29. R.HuckfeldtJ.MendezT.Osborn (2004b) Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: the political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology25(1): 65–95.
30. S.IyengarK.S.Hahn (2009) Red media, blue media: evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication59(1): 19–39.
31. L.R.JacobsF.L.CookM.X.Delli Carpini (2009) Talking Together: Public Deliberation and Political Participation in America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32. L.KeeleJ.Wolak (2008) Contextual sources of ambivalence. Political Psychology29: 653–673.
33. J.KimR.O.WyattE.Katz (1999) News, talk, opinion, participation: the part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication16(4): 361–385.
34. Kim Y, Chen H and Gil de Zúñiga H (2013) Stumbling upon news on the internet: effects of incidental news exposure and relative entertainment use on political participation. Computers in Human Behavior29(6): 2607–2614.
35. Y.KimS.H.HsuH.Gil de Zúñiga (2013) Social media Use and personality traits: effects on individuals’ discussion network heterogeneity and civic participation. Journal of Communication63(3): 498–516.
36. J.M.LaddG.S.Lenz (2008) Exploiting a rare shift in communication flows to document news media persuasion: the 1997 United Kingdom general election. Working paper SSRN Library no. 1189811. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1189811.
37. E.O.Laumann (1973) Bonds of Pluralism: The Form and Substance of Urban Social Networks. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
38. J.K.LeeJ.ChoiC.Kim. (2014) Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication64(4): 702–722.
39. L.C.LevitanP.S.Visser (2009) Social network composition and attitude strength: exploring the dynamics within newly formed social networks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology44(3): 640–649.
40. S.R.LundgrenR.Prislin (1998) Motivated cognitive processing and attitude change. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin24(7): 715–726.
41. J.M.McLeodD.A.ScheufeleP.Moy. (1999) Understanding deliberation the effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research26(6): 743–774.
42. L.MolyneuxK.VasudevanH.Gil de Zúñiga (2015) Gaming social capital: finding civic value in multiplayer video games. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication20(4): 381–399.
43. D.C.Mutz (2002) The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science46(4): 838–855.
44. D.C.MutzP.S.Martin (2001) Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: the role of mass media. American Political Science Review95(1): 97–114.
45. D.C.MutzP.M.SnidermanR.A.Brody (eds) (1996) Political Persuasion and Attitude Change. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
46. Z.Papacharissi (2011) A Networked Self: Identity, Community and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge.
47. B.Pescosolido (1992) Beyond rational choice: the social dynamics of how people seek help. American Journal of Sociology97(4): 1096–1138.
48. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2013) July 2013 political survey, methodology. Available at: http://www.people-press.org
49. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2014a) 6 new facts about Facebook. Available at: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/03/6-new-facts-about-facebook/
50. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2014b) Politics and advocacy in the social media era. Available at: http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/07/29/politics-and-advocacy-in-the-social-media-era/
51. A.R.PratkanisM.E.Turner (1996) Persuasion and democracy: strategies for increasing deliberative participation and enacting social change. Journal of Social Issues52(1): 187–205.
52. A.Quan-HaaseA.L.Young (2010) Uses and gratifications of social media: a comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society30(5): 350–361.
53. H.RojasH.Gil de Zúñiga (2010) Comunicacion y participacion politica en Colombia. In: (eds) Comunicacion y comunidad. Bogota, NJ: Universidad Externado de Colombia, pp. 105–188.
54. D.M.Ryfe (2005) Does deliberative democracy work?Annual Review Political Science8: 49–71.
55. L.J.SaxS.K.GilmartinA.N.Bryant (2003) Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education44: 409–432.
56. D.A.ScheufeleB.W.HardyD.Brossard. (2006) Democracy based on difference: examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication56(4): 728–753.
57. B.Sinclair (2012) The Social Citizen: Peer Networks and Political Behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
58. C.M.SmithR.S.TindaleB.L.Dugoni (1996) Minority and majority influence in freely interacting groups: qualitative versus quantitative differences. British Journal of Social Psychology35(1): 137–149.
59. C.SteinfieldN.B.EllisonC.Lampe (2008) Social capital, self-esteem, and use of social network sites: a longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology29(6): 434–445.
60. N.J.Stroud (2008) Media use and political predispositions: revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior30(3): 341–366.
61. S.ValenzuelaA.ArriagadaA.Scherman (2012) The social media basis of youth protest behavior: the case of Chile. Journal of Communication62(2): 299–314.
62. S.ValenzuelaA.ArriagadaA.Scherman (2014) Facebook, Twitter, and youth engagement: a Quasi-experimental study of social media use and protest behavior using propensity score matching. International Journal of Communication8(25): 2046–2070.
63. K.C.Walsh (2004) Talking About Politics: Informal Groups and Social Identity in American Life. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
64. M.E.WojcieszakD.C.Mutz (2009) Online groups and political discourse: do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement?Journal of Communication59(1): 40–56.
65. W.Wood (2000) Attitude change: persuasion and social influence. Annual Review of Psychology51(1): 539–570.
66. S.W.YooH.Gil de Zúñiga (2014) Connecting Blog, Facebook, and Twitter use with gaps in knowledge and participation. Communication & Society27(4): 33–48.