Political Discussion Networks Research Articles

Political and Social Discussion Network Survey Items Are Not Interchangeable

AbstractExperimentalists and survey researchers regularly measure the makeup and size of respondent personal discussion networks to learn about the social context in which citizens make political choices. When measuring these personal networks, some scholars use question prompts that specifically ask respondents about whom they discuss “politics” with, while others use more general prompts that ask respondents about whom they discuss “important matters” with. Prior research suggests that “political” discussion network prompts create self-reported networks that are substantively similar to “important matters” prompts. We conduct a nationally representative survey experiment to re-evaluate this question. Our results suggest that, although the size of networks generated by the two questions may be similar on average, the two questions generate different response distributions overall. In particular, respondents interested in politics report larger political discussion networks than general discussion networks, and respondents uninterested in politics report smaller political discussion networks than general discussion networks.

The formation of political discussion networks.

Dialogues among politicians provide a window into political landscapes and relations among parties and nations. Existing research has focused on the outcomes of such dialogues and on the structure of social networks on which they take place. Little is known, however, about how political discussion networks form and which are the main driving forces behind their formation. We study a collection of ego-networks from 30 randomly sampled Romanian politicians to reveal fundamental processes behind the formation of political discussion networks. We show that ties in such networks tend to be strong and balanced, and that their organization is not affected by sex, age or education homophily. We use the exponential family of random graph models for small networks to assess likely closure mechanisms and possible homophily effects, but we note that further research and additional data are needed to fully understand the impact of context and political affiliations on the generalization of our findings.

The more you know, the less you like: A comparative study of how news and political conversation shape political knowledge and affective polarization

The contemporary communication ecology contributes to affective polarization by presenting us with extreme exemplars of disliked groups. News exposure that is associated with political discussion networks is related to greater political knowledge, yet unlike previous eras where political knowledge and tolerance went hand in hand, this is no longer the case. We employ a comparative design to examine this idea among two democracies with differing levels of journalistic professionalism and political system: Mexico and the United States. Results show that greater political knowledge is associated with affective polarization, especially for the United States. Furthermore, there was a significant indirect path between media use and affective polarization, mediated through homogeneous political talk and political knowledge, but not in Mexico.

Who Talks and Who Listens? How Political Involvement Influences the Potential for Democratic Deliberation in Everyday Political Talk

In times of rising partisan polarization and increasing disenchantment with political elites, everyday political talk could constitute an important venue for citizen deliberation. Everyday political discussions offer ordinary people opportunities to strengthen deliberative skills, form considered preferences ,and hone political identities in relation to others. However, informal political discussions seldom follow the norms of formal deliberative fora, calling into question how often such everyday talk really enables democratic deliberation in the broader public. The answer is essential to assess the deliberative potential of everyday political talk and thus to understand its role in the deliberative system. Focusing on the democratic and deliberative standards of reason-giving, mutual respect, equality, and inclusion, we develop a multi-step model of democratic deliberation in everyday political talk, in which the potential for democratic deliberation depends on the presence of all four core standards. As individuals’ propensity for democratic deliberation is likely to vary with their level of political involvement, both in terms of how much they care about politics and how strongly they identify with political groups, we consider both dimensions when modeling democratic deliberation in individuals’ everyday political discussions. We test all steps of the model with data from a large panel survey tracing the informal political discussion networks of 18,079 German voters during the year leading up to the national elections in 2017. Our findings indicate that everyday political talk is more deliberative than expected, as the three core standards of democratic deliberation we can measure are largely upheld in people’s political exchanges.

Talking Politics: Political Discussion Networks and the New American Electorate. By Taylor N. Carlson, Marisa Abrajano, and Lisa García Bedolla. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 256p. $99.00 cloth, $27.95 paper.

Talking Politics: Political Discussion Networks and the New American Electorate. By Taylor N. Carlson, Marisa Abrajano, and Lisa García Bedolla. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020. 256p. 27.95 paper. - Volume 19 Issue 1

Cross-national variation in political network size, distribution, and prediction

Network size has a fundamental influence on other network properties. As studies of social network size have accumulated beyond the U.S. and Western Europe, diversity in the networks examined and methods used to construct size estimates have hindered the ability to make direct cross-national comparisons. We employ data from a summary political discussion network size measure in 17 surveys conducted in 15 countries between 2012 and 2018. We offer improved cross-national data on political network size distributions and estimate aggregate and country-specific models to understand the factors, both social and political, that predict political network size within countries.

Beyond social media news use algorithms: how political discussion and network heterogeneity clarify incidental news exposure

PurposeTraditionally, most readers' news access and consumption were based on direct intentional news seeking behavior. However, in recent years the emergence and popularization of social media platforms have enabled new opportunities for citizens to be incidentally informed about public affairs and politics as by-product of using these platforms. This article seeks to shed light on how socio-political conversation attributes may explain incidental exposure to information.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on US and UK survey data, the authors explore the role of political discussion and discussion network heterogeneity in predicting individuals' levels of incidental exposure to news. Furthermore, the authors also test the role of social media news use as a moderator. A hierarchical OLS regression analysis with incidental news exposure as dependent variable was conducted as well as analyses of moderation effects (heterogeneity*social media and political discussion*social media) using the PROCESS macro in SPSS.FindingsFindings reveal that heterogeneous networks are positively related to incidental news exposure in the UK, while sheer level of political discussion is a positive influence over incidental news exposure in the US. Social media news use moderates the relationship between political discussion and incidental news exposure in the UK. That is, those who are highly exposed to news on social media and discuss less often about politics and public affairs, they tend to be incidentally exposed to news online the most. Meanwhile, the interaction of social media news and discussion heterogeneity showed significant results in the US with those exhibiting high levels of both also receiving the biggest share of INE.Originality/valueThis study contributes to closing research gaps regarding how and when people are inadvertently exposed to news in two Western societies. By highlighting that beyond the fate of algorithmic information treatment by social media platforms, discussion antecedents as well as social media news use play an integral part in predicting incidental news exposure, the study unravels fundamental conditions underlying the incidental news exposure phenomenon.

Who Cares If You Vote? Partisan Pressure and Social Norms of Voting

Social norms are important in explaining why people vote, but where do those norms come from and is social pressure motivated by partisanship? In this article, we use political discussion network data to examine the role of party identification in shaping the relationship between injunctive norms, civic duty and voter turnout. More specifically, we examine the extent to which both the application of injunctive norms and their impact on turnout is affected by shared partisan identification. We find that citizens are more likely to perceive normative pressure to vote from fellow partisans, a phenomenon we refer to as “partisan pressure”. However we do not find consistent evidence for the hypothesis that turnout is more closely related to the approval or disapproval of discussants who share a partisanship. By separating the role of social pressure from that of normative beliefs we also demonstrate that injunctive norms affect voter turnout both directly and indirectly by increasing civic duty.

Close Relationships in Close Elections

Abstract Close elections are rare, but most Americans have experienced a close election at least once in their lifetime. How does intense politicization in close elections affect our close relationships? Using four national egocentric network surveys during the 1992, 2000, 2008, and 2016 election cycles, I find that close elections are associated with a modest decrease in network isolation in Americans’ political discussion networks. While Americans are more politically engaged in close elections, they also are less likely to be exposed to political dissent and more likely to deactivate their kinship ties to discuss politics. I further investigate a potential mechanism, the extent of political advertising, and show that cross-cutting exposure is more likely to disappear in states with more political ads air. To examine the behavioral consequence of close elections within American families, I revisit large-scale cell phone location data during the Thanksgiving holiday in 2016. I find that Americans are less likely to travel following close elections, and that families comprised of members with strong, opposing political views are more likely to shorten their Thanksgiving dinner. These results illuminate a process in which politicization may “close off” strong-tied relationships in the aftermath of close elections.

Polarized Networks? New Evidence on American Voters’ Political Discussion Networks

An important mechanism of mass political polarization involves citizens’ social networks: how politically homogeneous are they, how has this changed over recent years, and which individual and contextual variables predict the degree of homogeneity in social networks? Moreover, what are the consequences of network homophily on political preferences and in and out-group perceptions? In this paper, we address these questions by combining data from the 2000 American National Election Study and original data from the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. Both surveys ask respondents a battery of questions about the individuals with whom they most frequently discuss politics, including perceived vote choice and level of political knowledge. Using these data, we offer an updated empirical assessment of how polarization is influencing—and is influenced by—social network homophily.

Do as I Say or Do as I Do? How Social Relationships Shape the Impact of Descriptive and Injunctive Norms of Voting

AbstractSocial norms play an important role in our understanding of why people vote, yet very little is known about the relative importance of descriptive and injunctive norms for voter turnout or how normative influence is affected by the political and social relationship between citizens. Using political discussion network data from the British Election Study, this article examines the joint effect of descriptive and injunctive norms on turnout. It demonstrates that citizens follow the example of those closest to them (descriptive norms), especially their partner, but they also respond to social approval of voting from political discussants regardless of the nature of their relationship.

Rise of the Machines? Examining the Influence of Social Bots on a Political Discussion Network

The growing influence of social bots in political discussion networks has raised significant concerns, particularly given their potential to adversely impact democratic outcomes. In this study, we report the results of a case study analysis of bot activity in a recent, high-profile political discussion network. Specifically, we examine the prevalence and impact of bots in a Twitter network discussing the Special Counsel investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections. Using this discussion network, we conduct a “before-and-after” analysis to examine the prevalence of social bots in the discussion network as well as their influence on key network features such as (1) network structure, (2) content/messaging, (3) sentiment, and (4) influentialness. Our findings suggest that bots can affect political discussion networks in several significant ways. We found that bot-like accounts created the appearance of a virtual community around far-right political messaging, attenuated the influence of traditional actors (i.e., media personalities, subject matter experts), and influenced network sentiment by amplifying pro-Trump messaging. The results of this analysis add to a growing body of literature on the use and influence of social bots while at the same time uniquely examining their influence in a nonelectoral, political setting.

Political Discussion Networks and Political Engagement among Voters of Color

Despite a large and growing literature documenting the powerful and positive role that political discussion networks exert on the political behavior among whites, we know little about how political discussion networks affect political behavior among voters of color. To fill this void in the existing literature, we conducted an original survey in California to gather information on a diverse group of registered voters’ political discussion networks and political engagement. The social positioning of ethnoracial groups in society, we contend, will affect how network characteristics explain their levels of political engagement. Our results support this contention. While we find that network characteristics, including network size, partisan homogeneity, and discussion frequency are positively associated with validated voter turnout and nonelectoral political participation, the effects are not uniform across black, Latino, Asian American, and white respondents. This is the first study that examines the relationship between political discussion network characteristics and political engagement among voters of color. Our analysis demonstrates that the opportunities for political integration and engagement offered by political discussion networks are not afforded equally across the U.S. electorate, which has important implications for broader patterns of engagement.

Diversity Without Disagreeability: A Multi-National Examination of Social Networks and Participation in Political Dialog

It is widely understood that individuals think and act differently depending on the real or perceived political views of their discussion network. At the same time, there is a growing concern that self-selection and algorithmic selection into similarly minded imbalanced social networks are forming political discussion silos and echo chambers, where only one opinion is heard. As such, many are calling for social network providers to develop algorithms that filter messages, not only for veracity, but to provide a balance of viewpoints. While there is a growing consensus that a diversity of viewpoints is necessary for a healthy a democracy, the impact of exposure to opposing points of view on political expression and participation remain unclear (Boulianne, 2015). This study is based on a 2017 web-survey of over 14,000 internet users from 7 countries to examine cross-national variations of the user’s social media political discussion networks and the potential impacts on political participation. Even though participation in agreeable networks is high, as would be expected, we find that social media users who find themselves in the minority in a diverse social media network still participate and engage, especially those with higher online skills. The result of this analysis are discussed in terms of cross-national differences and the potential implications of forcing or filtering differing opinions within a network. These findings can lend insights into policy decisions related to algorithmic filtering and related attempts aimed at increasing exposure to diversity of viewpoints within social networks.

Talking Politics and Engaging in Activism: The Influence of Publics’ Social Networks on Corporations in the Public Sphere

Scholars have extensively theorized how citizens’ political discussion networks have implications for elected political actors and can affect political and civic participation and knowledge. We shift the focus to another important political actor—corporations—to examine whether political discussion networks affect citizens’ perceptions of a politically involved corporation and their intentions to engage in consumer activism. With social network influence perspective and an egocentric design, we examined the influences of one’s network characteristics, opinion climate, and network heterogeneity. We found that the ethnic diversity of discussion partners and heterogeneity of opinions substantially influenced perceptions and behavioral intentions.

Sacred Alters: The Effects of Ego Network Structure on Religious and Political Beliefs

Does who we know impact how strongly we believe? The claim seems reasonable, but research linking social network composition to political beliefs has produced conflicting results. We argue that methodological differences in measuring close ties can explain these inconsistencies and that work on the sacred umbrella provides a useful framework for moving forward. The sacred umbrella argues that when people close to you share your religious beliefs, you are shielded from doubt and uncertainty; perhaps the same mechanism also operates for political views. Using General Social Survey data, we find that religious or political discussion network heterogeneity predicts the strength of beliefs associated with one’s religion or political party, respectively. A religiously or politically homogenous network appears to strengthen certain values associated with the belief system.

Discussants that mobilise: Ethnicity, political discussion networks and voter turnout in Britain

Political discussion networks significantly influence citizens' political behaviours and attitudes. They promote political information and facilitate mobilisation and conformity to social norms (Fowler, 2005; Huckfeldt and Sprague, 1995). It has been suggested that ethnicity plays an important role in shaping the composition and impact of these networks (Leighley and Matsubayashi, 2009). In this paper, we employ discussion network data to contribute to this debate and explore the relationship between co-ethnic discussants and their political characteristics, which we refer to as mobilisation value; how these relationships vary across ethnic minority/majority groups; and the implication of these phenomena for voter turnout in Britain. We find that, for White British, co-ethnic discussants have greater mobilisation value. However, overall, for Asians and other ethnic groups have higher mobilisation value than White British or Black respondents. In turn the mobilisation value of discussants has a positive effect on turnout regardless of a citizen's own ethnicity.

Does Social Disagreement Attenuate Partisan Motivated Reasoning? A Test Case Concerning Economic Evaluations

AbstractResearch on partisan motivated reasoning shows that citizens perceive the world differently based upon their partisan allegiances. Here we marshal evidence from several national surveys to investigate whether partisan motivated reasoning is attenuated among partisans situated within disagreeable political discussion networks. While our analyses suggest that exposure to interpersonal disagreement is associated with weaker partisan identities, we find limited evidence that disagreement attenuates partisan differences in knowledge or retrospective evaluations of the economy. This suggests that interpersonal disagreement is unlikely to help reduce partisan motivated reasoning. Our results thus speak to important debates concerning the influence of social discussion on political attitudes, the nature of partisan motivated reasoning and the ability of citizens to hold elites accountable.

What Predicts Selective Avoidance on Social Media? A Study of Political Unfriending in Hong Kong and Taiwan

One of the democratic promises of social media relies on the expectation that citizens will be exposed to more diverse sources of information and will consequently be more likely to encounter views that challenge their beliefs and opinions. Still, recent evidence suggests that although social media may increase exposure to difference, citizen also take active steps to reduce the dissonance they encounter by engaging in selective avoidance tactics such as political unfriending and unfollowing. We report the findings from the first comparative study of political unfriending conducted in Asia, which analyzes survey data from two Chinese societies, Hong Kong and Taiwan. We find that political interest, political discussion network size, and political discussion with distant others all predict the likelihood of engaging in selective avoidance on social media. The results also suggest that political interest is a stronger predictor of unfriending in Hong Kong, while social and psychological factors play a more important role in Taiwan.

“It could turn ugly”: Selective disclosure of attitudes in political discussion networks

This article documents individuals selectively disclosing their political attitudes and discusses the consequences of these communication patterns for social influence and the democratic process. Using a large, diverse sample of U.S. resident adults, we ask under which conditions do people reveal their political preferences versus keeping them close to the vest. We find Americans are more likely to share their opinions with friends and family rather than co-workers and they are more likely to share their opinions on more salient topics. More importantly, they withhold their political attitudes specifically from those with whom they disagree in an attempt to avoid conflict. This produces the experience of highly homogeneous social contexts, in which only liberal or conservative views are voiced, while dissent remains silent, and oftentimes goes unacknowledged. This experience is not the result of homogeneous social contexts but the appearance of them. Paradoxically, the mechanism of selective disclosure, whose goal is to prevent conflict at the micro-level, might lead to the perception of greater division in the larger society.