Personality, Interpersonal Disagreement, and Electoral Information

Lyons, Jeffrey; Sokhey, Anand Edward; McClurg, Scott D.; Seib, Drew

doi:10.1086/685734

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such moderators may be situated either on the individual or at the contextual level and they may lead to a negative effect for some individuals while for others, cross-pressures may foster participation. To give some recent examples, personality traits such as agreeableness or extroversion (Lyons, Sokhey, McClurg, & Seib, 2016) or general social trust (Matthes, 2013) as well as concepts such as political interest or efficacy, and the strength of ideology may matter in this context. The problem is that the impact of such moderators cannot be assessed in a meta-analysis unless they are treated as systematic factors in, for instance, experimental studies.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Participation

Matthes¹,

Knoll

Valenzuela³

et al. 2019

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scholars have advanced many theoretical explanations for expecting a negative or positive relationship between individuals' cross-cutting exposure-either through interpersonal or mediated forms of communication-and their political participation. However, whether cross-cutting exposure is a positive or negative predictor of participation is still an unsettled question. To help fill this gap, we conducted a meta-analysis of 48 empirical studies comprising more than 70,000 participants examining the association between cross-cutting exposure and political participation. The meta-analysis produced two main findings. First, it shows that, over all studies, there is no significant relationship, r = .002, Zr = .002 (95% CI = −.04 to .05). Second, the null relationship cannot be explained by variations in the characteristics of cross-cutting environments (e.g., topic, place, or source of exposure), participation outcomes (e.g., online vs. offline activities), or methods employed (e.g., experiment vs. survey). Taken together, these results should alleviate concerns about negative effects of cross-cutting exposure on political engagement. Implications for future research are discussed.Keywords disagreement, political participation, cross-cutting exposure, political discussion, meta-analysis One of the most studied aspects in contemporary political communication research refers to cross-cutting exposure, that is, the disagreement in viewpoints encountered by individuals in their communication environments. Whether through informal conversations or media use, scholars have found support for the many extolled virtues of exposure to disagreeable political opinions. To name just a few, it has been found that encountering disagreement increases individuals' tolerance (Pattie & Johnston, 2008), Jörg Matthes is professor of communication science and Chair of the Department of Communication, University of Vienna. Johannes Knoll is head of market research at an exhibition company. He is a former member of the Advertising and Media Effects research group at the

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Participation

Matthes¹,

Knoll

Valenzuela³

et al. 2019

Political Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One aspect of talk about which there is little disagreement is the importance of citizens encountering views different from their own, that is, disagreement. The paradox of disagreement in political talk is that whereas encountering disagreement is essential to talk's deliberative and integrative capacities, it also is uncomfortable for citizens (Schudson, 1997), which leads them to avoid it-a phenomenon described from various theoretical vantage points, including the spiral of silence (Noelle-Neumann, 1974), psychology and personality (Hibbing, Ritchie, & Anderson, 2011;Lyons, Sokhey, McClurg, & Seib, 2016), and cognitive dissonance (see discussion in Huckfeldt et al, 2004). Given this, it is reasonable to ask why citizens encounter disagreement in political talk (Baldassarri & Bearman, 2007;Eliasoph, 1998;Huckfeldt et al, 2004).…”

Section: Encountering Disagreement In Political Talkmentioning

confidence: 99%

When We Stop Talking Politics: The Maintenance and Closing of Conversation in Contentious Times

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…People can anticipate talking to others about political news by seeking out additional information, for example, to counter opposing viewpoints to strengthen their own argument. All in all, it is expected that interpersonal disagreement could drive information seeking/interest in information about politics (Lyons et al. 2016).…”

Section: Interpersonal Political Discussion On Instant Messaging Appsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this way, respondents were not necessarily exposed to a variety of different political viewpoints and arguments—limiting the motivation to develop more informed views and advance their own political opinions, and thereby their interest in politics (Torcal and Maldonado 2014). In addition, respondents were less likely to, for example, seek additional information as they did not have to counter opposing viewpoints to strengthen their own arguments (Lyons et al. 2016).…”

Section: Conclusion and Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

WhatsApp with Politics?!

Vermeer

Kruikemeier

Trilling

et al. 2020

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With an increasing number of people, especially adolescents, using more private online platforms, such as WhatsApp, for news, an important question for democracy is whether such platforms can facilitate learning about politics and current events. In this study, we examine adolescents’ affective (emotions, feelings), behavioral (actions and behavioral intentions), and cognitive (political knowledge) responses to interpersonal political discussion on WhatsApp. We conducted a preregistered field experiment at six secondary schools in the Netherlands ( N = 230). We assigned respondents with strong ties to a WhatsApp group. For seven days, respondents received a link to an online political news item on a daily basis; and (1) either had to read or (2) read and discuss it. The results indicate that interpersonal discussion evokes stronger positive emotions and feelings, as well as issue-specific knowledge. In addition, elaboration on the content of political discussion was positively related to issue-specific knowledge. In this way, instant messaging apps may serve as a resource for engaging adolescents with politics and current events.

show abstract

Personality, Interpersonal Disagreement, and Electoral Information

Cited by 7 publications

References 48 publications

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Participation

A Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Cross-Cutting Exposure on Political Participation

When We Stop Talking Politics: The Maintenance and Closing of Conversation in Contentious Times

WhatsApp with Politics?!

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About