Racionalidade online: provimento de razões em discussões virtuais

Mendonça, Ricardo Fabrino; Amaral, Ernesto F. L.

doi:10.1590/1807-01912016222418

Cited by 14 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In our case, public hearings offered citizens the opportunity to watch experts, politicians, and leaders from advocacy entities debate the issue at hand and to submit questions to the panelists, and therefore issue more justified comments, even in synchronous online communication. The Facebook Page users, nevertheless, were more likely to post reasoned comments than news website users, contradicting previous studies (Esau et al, 2017;Mendonça and Amaral, 2016). A possible explanation for this discrepancy is that the Facebook page in our case, being organized by more than 150 advocacy and activist entities, offered qualified yet accessible information on some complicated issues, improving reason-giving among commenters.…”

Section: Disagreement Digital Forums and Beyondcontrasting

confidence: 98%

“…The results were mixed. Comments posted in the public hearing platform have almost four times (3.73) more chances of containing simple justification than those in Facebook, corroborating the view that online platforms specially designed to host political discussions enhances users’ reason-giving (Esau et al, 2017; Mendonça and Amaral, 2016; Strandberg and Grönlund, 2014, 2018). When it comes to complex justification, however, participants plugged into the public hearing forum are less likely to post comments with this type of justification (0.54) compared to Facebook participants.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 56%

“…Empirical research has shown that online forums that provide background information about the topic of deliberation improve the quality of users' discussions. As Mendonça and Amaral (2016) concluded by comparing comments in four online forums (legislatorial-consultant, news website, YouTube, and Facebook), legislative discussants were most likely to justify their views. Esau et al (2017) found similar patterns that news websites performed better in sustaining deliberation than did Facebook, particularly when it comes to reason-giving.…”

Section: Interactional Communicative Factors Associated With Disagreementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

What Kind of Disagreement Favors Reason-Giving? Analyzing Online Political Discussions across the Broader Public Sphere

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study adopts a systemic approach, focusing on real-world online discussions in legislative-, media-, and activist-based forums, to explore a set of factors that affects reasoned disagreement in digital environments. While conventional analysis investigates the effects of disagreement on civic and political participation, this study unpacks forms of disagreement that retain a principled link with reason-giving. Our findings demonstrate that context matters for shaping online communication, but that other variables have even stronger correlations. Specifically, moderating disagreement—conceptualized as a way of disagreeing that nevertheless signals a background of agreement in the conversation—strongly increases the likelihood of justificatory behavior, and it does so in more categories than bold disagreement. In conclusion, we argue that forms of disagreement and their respective consequences deserve more empirical and normative attention, not only to advance debates on deliberation but also to critically understand the communicative complexities in a new media landscape.

show abstract

Section: Disagreement Digital Forums and Beyondcontrasting

confidence: 98%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 56%

Section: Interactional Communicative Factors Associated With Disagreementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

What Kind of Disagreement Favors Reason-Giving? Analyzing Online Political Discussions across the Broader Public Sphere

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, users should be encouraged by positive awards to support their statements in the form of links to credible websites, as this increases the quality of conversation, which further affects the nature of the impact on health outcomes [ 70 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ill Literates or Illiterates? Investigating the eHealth Literacy of Users of Online Health Communities

Petrič¹,

Atanasova²,

Kamin³

2017

J Med Internet Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundElectronic health (eHealth) literacy is an important skill that allows patients to navigate intelligibly through the vast, often misleading Web-based world. Although eHealth literacy has been investigated in general and specific demographic populations, it has not yet been analyzed on users of online health communities (OHCs). Evidence shows that OHCs are important Web 2.0 applications for patients for managing their health, but at the same time, warnings have been expressed regarding the quality and relevance of shared information. No studies exist that investigate levels of eHealth literacy among users of OHCs and differences in eHealth literacy between different types of users.ObjectiveThe study aimed to investigate eHealth literacy across different types of users of OHCs based on a revised and extended eHealth literacy scale (eHEALS).MethodsThe study was based on a cross-sectional Web survey on a simple random sample of 15,000 registered users of the most popular general OHC in Slovenia. The final sample comprised 644 users of the studied OHC. An extended eHEALS (eHEALS-E) was tested with factor analytical procedures, whereas user types were identified with a hierarchical clustering algorithm. The research question was analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) procedure and pairwise comparison tests.ResultsFactor analysis of the revised and extended eHEALS revealed six dimensions: awareness of sources, recognizing quality and meaning, understanding information, perceived efficiency, validating information, and being smart on the Net. The factor solution demonstrates a good fit to the data (root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA]=.059). The most developed dimension of eHEALS-E is awareness of different Internet sources (mean=3.98, standard deviation [SD]=0.61), whereas the least developed is understanding information (mean=3.11, SD=0.75). Clustering resulted in four user types: active help-seekers (48.3%, 311/644), lurkers (31.8%, 205/644), core relational users (16.9%, 109/644), and low-engaged users (3%, 19/644). Analysis of the research question showed statistically significant differences among user types across all six dimensions of eHEALS-E. Most notably, core relational users performed worse than lurkers on the validating information dimension (P=.01) and worse than active help-seekers on the being smart on the Net dimension (P=.05). Active help-seekers have the highest scores in all dimensions of the eHEALS-E, whereas low-engaged users have statistically significantly lower scores on all dimensions of the eHEALS-E in comparison with the other groups.ConclusionsThose who are looking for advice and support in OHCs by making queries are well equipped with eHealth literacy skills to filter potential misinformation and detect bad advice. However, core relational users (who produce the most content in OHCs) have less-developed skills for cross-validating the information obtained and navigating successfully through the perils of the online world. Site managers should monitor their activity ...

show abstract

“…Além disso, as autoras também consideram as modalidades, digitais e presenciais, de engajamento passivo, nas categorias de atenção à informação, discussão política e atividades de expressão de preferências políticas. SEGERBERG, 2013;MILAN, 2015;MENDONÇA;AMARAL, 2016;TUFEKCI, 2014), sendo que a exposição da mobilização dos agentes ativa as redes sociais às quais estão conectados e aumenta a conscientização acerca de problemas sociais e políticos, de forma que a internet atua como um local onde podem-se exercer pressões sociais ou políticas para a resolução destes problemas (THEOCHARIS, 2015) Dessa forma, podemos dizer que as atividades políticas executadas exclusivamente no ambiente digital tendem a se diferenciar das presenciais em função dos recursos que acionam (BEST; KRUEGER, 2005). Assim, a ação política no ambiente on-line tem um menor custo executivo (principalmente nas redes sociais, já que são necessários apenas alguns cliques para pôr em prática tal ação), mas um maior custo simbólico, principalmente perante a rede pessoal.…”

Section: Em Busca De Um Realismo: Os Olhares Que Interagem Múltiplas unclassified

Da polarização à busca pelo equilíbrio: as relações entre internet e participação política

Hansen

Ferreira

2018

RECP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

RESUMOO Estado e a sociedade civil possuem uma relação muitas vezes tensionada e conflituosa, apesar de fundamental no contexto democrático ocidental. Estas instâncias, por sua vez, têm encontrados inúmeros desafios em função dos impactos da popularização do acesso à internet. Este artigo se situa nesta interconexão entre internet e democracia e objetiva analisar como a literatura sobre participação política tem abordado essa relação, apresentando as principais perspectivas teóricas a esse respeito. Assim, mostramos como as perspectivas iniciais eram mais estanques e polarizadas, bem como os movimentos no campo para que se adotasse uma abordagem mais flexível e complexa, que leva em conta as diversas características individuais, contextuais e da tecnologia em si, importantes para se pensar o impacto da rede nas atividades políticas off-line, mas, também, o surgimento de um ativismo estritamente on-line. Portanto, a literatura tem considerado que a internet alcançou um papel central para o entendimento do ativismo político, principalmente de protesto, a qual atua sobre a sua organização, suas formas e modalidades. Por outro lado, considera-se que a internet apresenta empecilhos em relação às possibilidade de controle de dados, privacidade e vigilância. Palavras-chave: Internet. Democracia. Participação política. ABSTRACTState and civil society have a tension relationship, confflited many times, but fundamental in the ocidental democratic context. They have found Challengers in the impacts of the popularization of the internet. This paper is in this interconection between internet and democracy and intents to analyse how the literature about political participation has abord this relationship, presenting the main theorical perspectives about the subject. We showed how the initial perspectives was more pounds and polarized, as movements in field to adopt one approach more complex and flexible, witch bring to debate individual, contextuals and the technology characteristics, very important to think the impact of the internet in political activity off-line, but also the rising of an ativism online only. There for, the literature had considered that the internet has achive the central role to understand the political ativism, specially protests, witch have a important role in the organization and your shapes and forms. But, we considered that the internet have barries about the possibilites of datas control, privacy and surveillance. Keywords: internet, democracy, political participation. RESUMENEl Estado y la sociedad civil poseen una relación muchas veces tensada y conflictiva, aunque fundamental en el contexto democrático occidental. Estas instancias, a su vez, han encontrado innumerables desafíos en función de los impactos de la popularización del acceso a Internet. Este artículo se sitúa en esta interconexión entre internet y democracia y objetiva analizar cómo la literatura sobre participación política ha abordado esa relación, presentando las principales perspectivas teóricas a ese respecto. Así, mostramos cómo...

show abstract

Racionalidade online: provimento de razões em discussões virtuais

Cited by 14 publications

References 29 publications

What Kind of Disagreement Favors Reason-Giving? Analyzing Online Political Discussions across the Broader Public Sphere

What Kind of Disagreement Favors Reason-Giving? Analyzing Online Political Discussions across the Broader Public Sphere

Ill Literates or Illiterates? Investigating the eHealth Literacy of Users of Online Health Communities

Da polarização à busca pelo equilíbrio: as relações entre internet e participação política

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About