Bringing Strong Ties Back in Interpersonal Gateways to Political Information and Influence

Abstract

With whom and how frequently do people discuss political matters? A theoretical model is formulated and tested using information on respondents' core social networks from the 1987 General Social Survey. The frequency of political discussions depends upon factors of demand (personal attributes) and supply (opportunities within social contexts). Educational attainment and age positively affect political discussion frequency, although indirectly through intervening political orientation and social contexts variables. Demand is positively related to political interest, strong party attachment, liberal views, and newspaper readership. The findings underscore the importance of including close relatives and friends (strong ties) in studying social contexts of political behavior. The opportunity structure (supply of potential discussants) is enhanced by the presence of a spouse and other adult household members, by being in the labor force, and by having close personal relationships with spatially proximate core associates.The classic Columbia voting studies (Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and Mc-Phee 1954;Lazarsfeld, Berelson, and Gaudet 1948) revealed the role of primary-group contacts (family, co-workers, and friends) as providers of political information and influence. Despite the importance of personal networks, little is known about the factors that promote and restrict the flow of political information and influence (Sheingold 1973, pp. 714-15; Weatherford 1982, pp. 119-20).

Personality and Political Discussion

“…This does not mean individual factors have not been considered at all. There is a substantial body of research on political influences such as direction of partisanship (Huckfeldt and Sprague 1995), strength of partisanship (Huckfeldt et al 2000), political awareness (Zaller 1992), political interest (Straits 1991), and political knowledge (McClurg 2006). Beyond such political attributes, research on the individual-level factors that influence patterns in social communication mostly have centered on demographic attributes, not psychological properties such as personality.…”

“…Scholarship in this area has shown that social communication matters for a wide array of other political phenomena such as attitude formation, electoral choice, other forms of participation, levels of political expertise, and tolerance. Thus far, research on the underpinnings of political discussion has focused on political factors (e.g., Huckfeldt et al 2000;Lake and Huckfeldt 1998;McClurg 2006;Straits 1991;Zaller 1992) as well as social and contextual forces such as the nature and origin of the relationship between conversation partners (e.g., Huckfeldt and Sprague 1995;Mutz 2006;Walsh 2004) and features of the national context (e.g., Anderson and Paskeviciute 2005;Gibson 2003;Iglic 2003;Mondak and Gearing 2003).…”

Families, divorce and voter turnout in the US

“…Divorce reduces the opportunities for child-parent interaction because one parent is absent. Research shows that the opportunity of political discussions is enhanced by the presence of adult household members (Straits, 1991), suggesting that children living in divorced families simply have fewer opportunities to discuss politics with their parents than children living in two-parent households.…”

Entity/Event-Level Sentiment Detection and Inference

“…More specifically, Davies (1965) suggests that political socialization begins at about the age of three and is basically completed by the age of thirteen. Sandell and Plutzer (2005: 137) argue that direct transmission occurs through explicit discussion of politics and public affairs enhanced by the presence of adult household members (see also : Straits 1991). Empirical evidence available suggests that parental discussions of social and political issues foster marginalized youths' participation in social action and political participation (Diemer andLi 2011, Diemer 2012).…”