Informal Political Conversation Across Time and Space: Setting the Research Agenda

Hopmann, David Nicolas; Matthes, Jörg; Nir, Lilach

doi:10.1093/ijpor/edv043

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cross-sectional surveys are useful for many reasons, the rapid pace of data collection being one of them. However, as has often been noted (see Hopmann, Matthes, & Nir, 2015), cross-sectional surveys raise concerns about spuriousness and reverse causal order (Boulianne, 2015; Skoric et al, 2016). If social media use, for instance, predicts participation controlling for all kinds of variables, we can equally assume the opposite effect: Those who tend to participate are also more likely to turn to social media.…”

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Although the limitations of such designs are well known and more panel studies have been published in recent years (e.g., Dimitrova, Shehata, Strömbäck, & Nord, 2014; Theocharis & Quintelier, 2016), cross-sectional studies continue to dominate research on social media and political campaigning. Even more importantly, the recent surge of interest in conditional process models has accelerated the use of cross-sectional data, further obscuring the limited usefulness of such designs (Hopmann et al, 2015). Conditional process models, applied to cross-sectional data, are purely correlational in nature and thus unable to test causal claims.…”

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even more importantly, most research is based on single-country studies, and truly comparative research is rare if not almost nonexistent (but see Mosca & Quaranta, 2016; Xenos, Vromen, & Loader, 2014). This is troubling because single-country studies are bound by the idiosyncrasies of the specific context (see Hopmann et al, 2015), and as a result, we lack knowledge about the contextual and cultural factors that drive the content and effects of social media in the political world. Therefore, we need to study social media content, use, and effects in a comparative context.…”

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges

Dimitrova¹,

Matthes²

2018

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of social media in political campaigning around the world is undeniable. Latest statistics show that close to three fourth of U.S. adults use social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter, with social network use becoming almost ubiquitous among young adults, according to recent data from the Pew Research Center (2018). Globally, an estimated 2.62 billion people use social networks on a daily basis in 2018, with that number projected to reach 2.77 billion by 2019 (Statista, 2018). With their tremendous growth, social media have become an indispensable part of modern political campaigning, both in the United States and internationally. Platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit have changed how political campaigns are run; how politicians and the public access and share political information; and the way we learn about politics, form opinions and attitudes, and ultimately engage in or disengage from the political process. While social media have clearly affected our understanding of political communication and its effects on the public, it is difficult to see clear monolithic effects. A 2009 meta-analysis showed that Internet use in general had positive, although relatively small, effects on different aspects of political engagement (Boulianne, 2009). Similarly, a 2015 meta-analysis demonstrated only limited effects of digital media use on political participation, showing that only half of 170 reported effects from 36 selected studies were statistically significant (Boulianne, 2015). Yet another meta-analysis found generally positive effects of social media on three different dimensions of engagement, namely, social capital, civic engagement, and political participation, when surveying 116 relationships/effects reported in 22 different studies (Skoric, Zhu, Goh, & Pang, 2016). These comprehensive aggregate studies offer evidence that the effects of social media consumption and use are hardly uniform across different contexts and groups. For example, studies with random samples of youth are more likely to identify a significant effect, compared with general population samples (Boulianne, 2015). Also, studies that rely on panel data are twice less likely to find positive and statistically significant relationships between social media use and political participation (Boulianne, 2015). Studies have also noted that the relationship between Internet use and political engagement varies depending on type of use. For example, findings by Gil de Zuniga, Bachmann, Hsu, and Brundidge (2013) suggest that only expressive 770437J MQXXX10.

show abstract

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Key Challenges and Directions For Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges

Dimitrova¹,

Matthes²

2018

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The vast majority of previous studies, however, is constituted by single-case studies (Hopmann et al, 2015). This limitation raises the question concerning the stability of patterns and effects of interpersonal discussions across political and cultural settings.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hopmann, 2012). So far, few studies have attempted to tackle the problem comparatively (Hopmann, 2012;Hopmann et al, 2015), and even fewer have attempted to combine cultural/contextual differences, political discussion and electoral behavior (Huckfeldt et al, 2005;Ikeda and Huckfeldt, 2001;Lup, 2016). Overall, the literature focusing on contextual determinants of the differences and similarities across countries in political discussion is limited.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political disagreement and vote volatility: the role of familism across different European countries

Mancosu

Hopmann²

2019

Eur. Pol. Sci. Rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpersonal influence shapes political behavior and attitudes. So far, however, little efforts have been devoted to testing this mechanism comparatively in Europe. This paper aims at explaining differences in influence patterns in three European countries (Italy, Germany, and the UK). Based on works in demography, we argue that in Mediterranean cultures (characterized by high degrees of familism), people are more prone to be affected by attitudes and behaviors of their relatives with respect to other strong ties (e.g., spouses), while in continental, northern Europe, and the UK, this effect is less important. We test this argument using longitudinal data. Consistent with expectations, results show that the influence of relatives in familistic contexts is stronger than in non-familistic ones. At the same time, the spouse effect (namely, the effect of an intimate, non-relative discussant) is particularly strong in non-familistic contexts (and vice versa). In sum, we demonstrate that public opinion studies can be strengthened by theories developed in other social sciences, such as demography.

show abstract

Spatial Polarization of Presidential Voting in the United States, 1992–2012: The “Big Sort” Revisited

Johnston

Manley

Jones

2016

Annals of the American Association of Geographers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

General rightsThis document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/pure/about/ebr-terms Much has been written in recent years about the claimed polarisation of the US electorate, with substantial differences as to whether there has been greater spatial polarisation, at several geographical scales, over recent decades. To assess the veracity of those alternative views, a bespoke data set showing percentage support for the Democratic Party's presidential candidates at the County, State and Divisional scales has been analysed using a robust, statistically-based measure of polarisation/segregation. The ecological results provide clear and compelling evidence of a trend towards greater polarisation across the nine Census Divisions, across the 49 States within those Divisions, and across the 3077 Counties within the States -with strong evidence that the differences over time at the last of those scales are highly statistically significant. Within those general trends, polarisation has been greater in some States than others and also within some States more than othersidentifying additional geographies calling for further research.

show abstract

Informal Political Conversation Across Time and Space: Setting the Research Agenda

Cited by 6 publications

References 35 publications

Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges

Social Media in Political Campaigning Around the World: Theoretical and Methodological Challenges

Political disagreement and vote volatility: the role of familism across different European countries

Spatial Polarization of Presidential Voting in the United States, 1992–2012: The “Big Sort” Revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About