Exploring the contingent effects of political efficacy and partisan strength on the relationship between online news use and democratic engagement

International Journal of Communication

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 1195-1215

  Chan, Michael ^a  

^a CHINESE UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Civic engagement; Internet use; Partisan strength; Political efficacy; Political participation

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011599374     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19328036     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. AAPOR. (2011). Standard definitions: Final dispositions of case codes and outcome rates for surveys (7th ed.). Retrieved from http://www.aapor.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Standard_Definitions2&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=3156
2. Bakker, T. P., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011). Good news for the future? Young people, Internet use, and political participation. Communication Research, 38, 451-470.
3. Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37, 122-144.
4. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication. Media Psychology, 3, 265-299.
5. Beaumont, E. (2010). Political agency and empowerment: Pathways for developing a sense of political efficacy in young adults. In L. R. Sherrod, J. Torney-Purta, & C. A. Flanagan (Eds.), Handbook of research on civic engagement in youth (pp. 525-558). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
6. Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 53-67.
7. Boulianne, S. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26, 193-211.
8. Brewer, M. B. (2001). The many faces of social identity: Implications for political psychology. Political Psychology, 22, 15-125.
9. Campbell, A., Converse, P., Miller, W., & Stokes, D. (1960). The American voter. New York, NY: Wiley.
10. Campbell, A., Gurin, G., & Miller, W. (1954). The voter decides. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
11. Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R model of communication effects. Communication Theory, 19, 66-88.
12. Delli Carpini, M. X. (2004). Mediating democratic engagement: The impact of communications on citizens' involvement in political and civic life. In L. L. Kaid (Ed.), Handbook of political communication research (pp. 395-434). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Delli Carpini, M. X., & Keeter, S. (2003). The civic web: Online politics and democratic values. In D. M. Anderson & M. Cornfield (Eds.), The civic web (pp. 129-156). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
14. Dylko, I. B. (2010). An examination of methodological and theoretical problems arising from the use of political participation indexes in political communication research. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22(4). 523-534.
15. Fiorina, M. P. (1981). Retrospective voting in American national elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
16. Gil de Zúñiga, H., Puig-i-Abril, E., & Rojas, H. (2009). Weblogs, traditional sources online and political participation: An assessment of how the Internet is changing the political environment. New Media & Society, 11, 553-574.
17. Greene, S. (2004). Social identity theory and party identification. Social Science Quarterly, 85(1), 136-153.
18. Hayes, A. F., & Matthes, J. (2009). Computational procedures for probing interactions in OLS and logistic regression: SPSS and SAS implementations. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 924-936.
19. Hayes, A. F., Glynn, C. J., & Huge, M. E. (2012). Cautions regarding the interpretation of regression coefficients and hypothesis tests in linear models with interactions. Communication Methods and Measures, 6, 1-11.
20. Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
21. Johnson, T. J., Bichard, S. L., & Zhang, W. (2009). Communication communities or "CyberGhettos"?: A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15, 60-82.
22. Jung, N., Kim, Y., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2011). The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 14, 407-430.
23. Kam, C. D., & Franzese Jr., R. J. (2007). Modeling and interpreting interactive hypotheses in regression analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
24. Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2004). A Web for all reasons: Uses and gratifications of Internet components for political information. Telematics and Informatics, 21, 197-223.
25. Kenski, K., & Stroud, N. J. (2006). Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 5, 173-192.
26. Lee, K. M. (2006). Effects of Internet use on college students' political efficacy. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9, 415-422.
27. Lewis-Beck, M. S., Jacoby, W. G., Norpoth, H., & Weisberg, H. F. (2008). The American voter revisited. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
28. McLeod, J. M., Guo, Z., Daily, K., Steele, C. A., Huang, H., Horowitz, E., & Chen, H. (1996). The impact of traditional and nontraditional media forms in the 1992 presidential election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 73, 401-416.
29. Newhagen, J. E. (1994). Self-efficacy and call-in political television show use. Communication Research, 21(3), 366-379.
30. Niemi, R. G., Craig, S. C., & Mattei, F. (1991). Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. The American Political Science Review, 85(4), 1407-1413.
31. Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide. New York, NY: Cambridge.
32. PEW (2012a) Trends in news consumption: 1991-2012: In changing news landscape, even television is vulnerable. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/section-2-online-and-digital-news-2
33. PEW. (2012b). Trends in American values: 1987-2012: Partisan polarization surges in Bush, Obama years. Retrieved from http://www.people-press.org/2012/06/04/partisan-polarization-surges-in-bush-obama-years/
34. Price, V., & Zaller, J. (1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception and their implications for research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57, 133-164.
35. Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
36. Romantan, A., Hornik, R., Price, V., Cappella, J., & Viswanath, K. (2008). A comparative analysis of the performance of alternative measures of exposure. Communication Methods and Measures, 2, 80-99.
37. Scheufele, D. A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29, 46-65.
38. Shah, D. V., Cho, J., William P. Eveland, J., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32, 531-565.
39. Smith, A. (2009). The Internet's role in campaign 2008. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2009/6-The-Internets-Role-in-Campaign-2008.aspx
40. Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
41. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33-47). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
42. Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2003). Unraveling the effects of the Internet on political participation? Political Research Quarterly, 56(2), 175-185.
43. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
44. Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
45. Wagner, M. W. (2011). Comparing the ANES and NAES for Political Communication Research. In E. P. Bucy & R. L. Holbert (Eds.), The sourcebook for political communication research (pp. 96-113). New York, NY: Routledge.
46. Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the Internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57, 704-718.
47. Zaller, J. R. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
48. Zickuhr, K., & Smith, A. (2012). Digital differences. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Digital-differences.aspx
49. Zukin, C., Keeter, S., Andolina, M., Jenkins, K., & Delli Carpini, M. X. (2006). A new engagement? Political participation, civic life, and the changing American citizen. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.