This study explores the direct and indirect links between structural heterogeneity, network heterogeneity, and political participation. We review the often conflicting scholarship on discussion network heterogeneity and political participation and place it within a multilevel conceptual framework of heterogeneity. Based on this integrated theoretical model, our study uses a combination of macro-level and individual-level survey data from various sources. First, we use a cross-sectional national data set, based on a telephone survey with a probability sample of almost 800 adults. Second, we combine these individual-level data with county-level data on religious, political, and racial heterogeneity. Based on these data sets, we develop a path model linking structure, context, and networks into an integrated pathway to evaluate the direct and indirect effects of heterogeneity on political participation. Our results show positive links between structural and network heterogeneity that are both direct and indirect, that is, mediated through various communication processes.Scholars studying heterogeneity and political participation have put forward opposing theories and conflicting evidence as to the relation between the two. Early voting research suggested that cross-pressures, or more generally stated political disagreement, discourages citizens' political participation, whereas more recent studies generally view disagreement within social networks as fostering collective deliberation, awareness, political knowledge, and consequently participation. Moreover, additional research has demonstrated how the context, or social space in which individuals are Corresponding author: Dietram A. Scheufele;
Aim/Purpose It appears that humans can become mal-informed and often consciously or subconsciously resist revising their mal-informed perspectives Background We need to apply behavioral and/or cognitive psychological approaches rather than traditional "educational" approaches Methodology Literature review Contribution Suggests revising research focus to affective rather than cognitive solutions Findings Teaching critical thinking helps but is not enough Impact on Society Many important societal decisions may be made emotionally rather than rationally Future Research Research affective as well as cognitive factors in decision-making
There has been deepening concern about political polarization in public attitudes toward the scientific community. The “intrinsic thesis” attributes this polarization to psychological deficiencies among conservatives as compared to liberals. The “contextual thesis” makes no such claims about inherent psychological differences between conservatives and liberals, but rather points to interacting institutional and psychological factors as the forces driving polarization. We evaluate the evidence for both theses in the context of developing and testing a theoretical model of audience response to dissonant science communication. Conducting a national online experiment ( N = 1,500), we examined audience reactions to both conservative-dissonant and liberal-dissonant science messages and consequences for trust in the scientific community. Our results suggest liberals and conservatives alike react negatively to dissonant science communication, resulting in diminished trust of the scientific community. We discuss how our findings link to the larger debate about political polarization of science and implications for science communicators.
IMPORTANCE COVID-19 has disproportionately affected Black individuals in the US; however, vaccination rates among Black individuals trail those among other racial groups. This disparity is often attributed to a high level of vaccine hesitancy among Black individuals, but few studies have examined changes in vaccine hesitancy over time. OBJECTIVES To compare changes in vaccine hesitancy between Black and White individuals in the US and to examine mechanisms that might help explain the observed differences. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This survey study used 7 waves of data collected using a panel design. A total of 1200 English-speaking adults in the US were recruited from a nonprobability online panel to construct a census-matched sample. Participants were contacted monthly between
Media‐based fact checking contributes to more accurate political knowledge, but its corrective effects are limited. We argue that biographical information included in a corrective message, which is often unrelated to the inaccurate claim itself, can activate misperception‐congruent naïve theories, increasing confidence in a misperception's plausibility and inducing skepticism toward denials. Resistance to corrections occurs regardless of initial belief accuracy, but the effect is strongest among those who find the contextual information objectionable or threatening. We test these claims using an online survey‐embedded experiment (N = 750) conducted in the wake of the controversy over the proposed Islamic cultural center in New York City near the site of the 9/11 attacks, and find support for our predictions. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
The success of a democracy depends, in part, on public demand for democratic institutions. How does Internet use shape citizens' preferences for regime type? Combining individual public opinion data from Africa and Asia with country-level indices, we test a multilevel model examining the relationship between Internet penetration, individual Internet use, and citizen demand for democracy across 28 countries. We find that Internet use, but not national Internet penetration, is associated with greater citizen commitment to democratic governance. Furthermore, greater democratization and Internet penetration moderates the relationship between Internet use and demand for democracy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.