Search results

Traditionally, 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.

Drawing 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.

Findings 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.

This 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.

The purpose of this study is to identify the structural processes that lead citizens to escape their common social circles when talking about politics and public affairs (e.g. “filter bubbles”). To do so, this study tests to what extent political attitudes, political behavior, news media consumption and discussion frequency affect discussion network heterogeneity among US citizens.

Supported by the polling group Nielsen, this study uses a two-wave panel online survey to study the antecedents and mechanisms of discussion network heterogeneity among US citizens. To test the hypotheses and answer the research questions, ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions (cross-sectional, lagged and autoregressive) and mediation analyses were conducted.

The findings imply that political discussion frequency functions as the key element in explaining the mechanism that leads politically interested and participatory citizens (online) as well as news consumers of traditional and online media to seek a more heterogeneous discussion network, disrupting the so-called “filter bubbles.” However, mediation analyses also showed that discussion frequency can lead to more homogenous discussion networks if people score high on political knowledge, possibly reflecting the formation of a close network of political-savvy individuals.

The survey data give important insights into the 2016 pre-election situation, trying to explain why US citizens were more likely to remain in homogenous discussion networks when talking about politics and public affairs. By using two-wave panel data, the analyses allow to draw tentative conclusions about the influential and inhibiting factors and mechanisms that lead individuals to seek/avoid a more heterogeneous discussion network.

The purpose of this study is to examine the knowledge gap hypothesis in the context of smartphone use for news to understand whether mobile news consumption could bridge or widen the knowledge gap between people of higher and lower socioeconomic status (SES).

The authors examine how smartphone news consumption is associated with the knowledge gap hypothesis by analyzing a survey dataset from Hong Kong. This study focuses specifically on a moderated mediation model in which the indirect effect of mobile news consumption on political knowledge via discussion network heterogeneity is contingent on level of education.

Smartphone use for news/information was positively associated with level of discussion network heterogeneity. The indirect effect of smartphone news use on political knowledge via discussion network heterogeneity was stronger for those with lower levels of education.

This study advances the understanding of the role of smartphone use in contributing to the functioning of deliberative democracy as this use enhances discussion network heterogeneity and general levels of political knowledge. Moreover, our study contributes to the literature on the knowledge gap by not only examining the relationship between smartphone use, discussion heterogeneity, and political knowledge but also taking into consideration individual levels of education.

Political polarization and incivility manifested itself online throughout the 2016 US presidential election. The purpose of this paper is to understand how features of social media platforms (e.g. reacting, sharing) impacted the online public sphere during the 2016 election.

After conducting in-depth interviews with politically interested young people and applying deductive coding procedures to transcripts of the interviews, Dahlberg’s (2004) six normative conditions for the public sphere were used to empirically examine this interview data.

While some participants described strategies for productive political discussion on Social Networking Sites (SNS) and a willingness to use them to discuss politics, many users’ experiences largely fall short of Dahlberg’s (2004) normative criteria for the public sphere.

The period in which these interviews were conducted in could have contributed to a more pessimistic view of political discussion in general.

Scholars and the public should recognize that the affordances of SNS for political discussion are not distributed evenly between different platforms, both for the sake of empirical studies of SNS moving forward and the state of democratic deliberation.

Although previous research has examined online and SNS-based political discussion as it relates to the public sphere, few attempts have been made understand how specific communicative practices or platform-specific features of SNS have contributed to or detracted from a healthy public sphere.

This study develops a computational method to investigate the predominant language styles in political discussions on Twitter and their connections with users' online characteristics.

This study gathers a large Twitter dataset comprising political discussions across various topics from general users. It utilizes an unsupervised machine learning algorithm with pre-defined language features to detect language styles in political discussions on Twitter. Furthermore, it employs a multinomial model to explore the relationships between language styles and users' online characteristics.

Through the analysis of over 700,000 political tweets, this study identifies six language styles: mobilizing, self-expressive, argumentative, narrative, analytic and informational. Furthermore, by investigating the covariation between language styles and users' online characteristics, such as social connections, expressive desires and gender, this study reveals a preference for an informational style and an aversion to an argumentative style in political discussions. It also uncovers gender differences in language styles, with women being more likely to belong to the mobilizing group but less likely to belong to the analytic and informational groups.

This study provides insights into the psychological mechanisms and social statuses of users who adopt particular language styles. It assists political communicators in understanding their audience and tailoring their language to suit specific contexts and communication objectives.

This study reveals gender differences in language styles, suggesting that women may have a heightened desire for social support in political discussions. It highlights that traditional gender disparities in politics might persist in online public spaces.

This study develops a computational methodology by combining cluster analysis with pre-defined linguistic features to categorize language styles. This approach integrates statistical algorithms with communication and linguistic theories, providing researchers with an unsupervised method for analyzing textual data. It focuses on detecting language styles rather than topics or themes in the text, complementing widely used text classification methods such as topic modeling. Additionally, this study explores the associations between language styles and the online characteristics of social media users in a political context.

The purpose of this paper is to provide teachers with research and methodological findings for planning, facilitating and assessing classroom discussions around difficult, political issues.

This paper focuses on navigating political polarization in classroom discussions. The research supported three teaching interns in developing classroom cultures where such discussions could and did happen.

Findings include the importance of having difficult discussions, the methods for doing so successfully and the introduction of a new activity, Daily Independent Listening.

In a climate of heightened partisanship, this research and these teaching examples provide models for all teachers engaging in such important work.

Everyday conversation has not yet been assigned its full role in public discussion of citizen’s issues, despite the growing number of studies about it. Casual conversations are not usually regarded as a particularly privileged place for political discussions mainly because of its apparent lack of organization following the principles and rules of the deliberative tradition in Political Studies. However, due to its closeness, informality, and personal proximity, it is particularly adequate to rise political aspects of everyday lives that otherwise would not be publicly disclosed. But how to grasp the spontaneity of everyday conversation? This chapter argues that focus groups, as a research method, are fit to observe and understand real-time ordinary conversation on political issues. In what follows, the argument goes threefold: (1) it contrasts “conversation” with “deliberation” from a micro-point of view; (2) all conversation, as a discourse embroiled in power relations, is political in a broad sense (3) as it brings forward personal views and experiences, casual conversations defies the borders between public and private issues.

This study examines whether online asynchronous discussion forums support student’s meaning-making about citizenship in a globalizing world. Citizenship is an increasingly contested identity for young people, yet they have few opportunities in traditional civic education to consider their own citizenship. Although online discussions are considered effective spaces for increasing dialogue and critical thinking between diverse students, there has been little research to understand how effective they are for helping students to construct new understandings of citizenship.

A content analysis approach was used to analyze and code 89 discussion board posts. The Interaction Analysis Model (IAM) coding scheme was used to describe and analyze the quality of knowledge construction that occurred across the posts focusing on different aspects of global citizenship.

The findings demonstrate that the discussion boards produced substantive talks about the meaning of citizenship that in some instances reached the level of new knowledge construction. The students considered different meanings for global citizenship and negotiated positions on key issues. However, the highest levels of knowledge construction were rarely reached.

A major implication is the need to organize and cue discussion boards to support knowledge construction in addition to fostering dialogue.

This study contributes to the role that technology can play in supporting students’ knowledge construction about global citizenship that go beyond the scripted meanings conveyed in civics classes.

The purpose of this paper is to study and assess the content, functioning and impact of institutional reforms aiming to enhance collective and holistic political leadership at the level of local government.

The authors conduct a comparative case study of two Danish frontrunner municipalities drawing on relevant documents and qualitative interviews with both elected politicians and public administrators.

The authors found that institutional design is effective in promoting collective and holistic political leadership at the local level, even if no formal design options are available and the municipalities have to invent their own designs. Support both from both councilors and administrators is paramount for successful implementation of local political leadership reforms.

Due to the purposive selection of a limited number of cases, the findings cannot be generalized to the population from which the cases are drawn. However, other municipalities may learn from and become inspired by the positive impact of the new institutional designs on collective and holistic political leadership.

Whereas some institutional political leadership reforms aim to enhance the power of the mayor and other reforms aim to create a cabinet or a committee system, the reforms the authors are studying aim to create a space for local councilors to work together across party and sector lines in creating collective and holistic policy solutions. The study shows that it is crucial that local councilors are involved in cross-boundary agenda setting before developing policies in standing committees and endorsing them in the council assembly.

There is a large amount of more or less wicked problems that require the formulation and implementation of innovative policy solutions, which, in turn, call for a clear and determined political leadership. However, local politicians typically suffer from decoupling and tunnel vision. The results show that these problems can be solved through new institutional designs that promote a more collective and holistic political leadership that can take the local community forward.

Few studies have hitherto addressed the need for institutional reforms enabling collective and holistic political leadership through both theoretical and empirical analyses, but that is exactly what the authors try to accomplish.

Grounded in the scholarship addressing teacher self-censorship around controversial topics, this paper aims to investigate a three-part research question: How do secondary English language arts (ELA) teacher–candidates (TCs) in the penultimate semester of their undergraduate teacher education program position political texts/speeches, interpret high school teens’ political standpoints and view the prospects of discussing political texts/speeches with students? The study findings provide insights to the ways some TCs might position themselves as novice ELA teachers relative to political texts/speeches, students, colleagues and families in their future school communities.

Audio-recorded data from whole-class and small-group discussions were coded for TCs’ positioning of political texts/speeches, interpretations of teens’ political standpoints and viewpoints on discussing with students President Obama’s speech, “A More Perfect Union” (“A.M.P.U.”) The coded data set was further analyzed to identify themes across the TCs’ perspectives.

The data set tells the story of a group of TCs whose positionalities, background knowledge and practical experiences in navigating divergent perspectives would influence both their daily selection and censorship of political texts/speeches like “A.M.P.U.” and their subsequent willingness to guide equitable yet critical conversations about controversial issues in the secondary ELA classroom.

In advance of the 2018 midterm elections, this paper considers how the common core state standards’ (CCSS) recommendations to include more nonfiction documents in ELA instruction positions ELA teachers to provide interdisciplinary support in helping students think critically about political issues. It expands on the body of scholarship that, thus far, has been primarily grounded in the research on social studies instruction.