Ambivalent Social Networks and Their Consequences for Participation |
| |
| Authors: | Nir Lilach |
| |
| Institution: | Lilach Nir (Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania, 2004) is assistant professor in the departments of communication and political science, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. Her research interests are in the social psychology of public opinion and political communication. Nir has published in Public Opinion Quarterly and Political Communication articles on opinion formation and expression, disagreement, and public opinion quality. |
| |
| Abstract: | Does perceived disagreement in political discussion help orhinder citizens’ political participation? Some argue thatdisagreement prompts reflection, perspective-taking, and tolerance.Challengers argue that disagreement fosters ambivalence andhinders participatory activities and turnout. One seminal studythat tackled this dilemma formulated the ‘cross-pressures’hypothesis (Lazarsfeld, Berelson, & Gaudet, 1944/1968),which posited that the more individuals are betwixt and betweenconflicting social positions, the longer the time for theirvote intention to crystallize (and the lower the likelihoodthey would vote). This paper offers a critique and refinementof the cross-pressures hypothesis. First, previous studies confoundedintra-individual and structural sources of cross-pressures.Second, past operationalizations of exposure to disagreementfocused on the sheer amount of opposition to the individual’spoint of view, rather than his or her exposure to two conflictingpoints of view. A new measure—network ambivalence—isproposed to capture the latter dynamic. Conceptual and methodologicalrefinements of the cross-pressures hypothesis are tested ona representative sample of voting-age respondents in the UnitedStates, interviewed on the American National Election Study2000 panel (N=1,555). Results suggest that not only were thesepressures hardly detrimental to participation, but they alsofacilitated the formation of considered electoral preferences. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 Oxford 等数据库收录！ |
|
