Journal of Communication · 2009 · 477 citations · 39 references
Political ProcessPublic OpinionSocial InfluencePolitical PolarizationPolitical BehaviorCommunicationSocial NetworkSocial SciencesNetwork SizePolitical CommunicationNetwork HeterogeneityPolitical CognitionMajority InfluenceSocial Network AnalysisDiscussion FrequencyCommunication EffectsPolitical Discussion FrequencyCommunication StudyArtsPolitical ParticipationPolitical KnowledgePolitical AttitudesPolitical AgendaPolitical PartiesPolitical SciencePublic Debate
In this study, we examine the influence of discussion frequency, network size, and 3 variables that together entangle the often misunderstood concept of network heterogeneity: discussion frequency with like-minded individuals (“safe” discussion), discussion frequency with nonlike-minded individuals (“dangerous” discussion), and diversity of discussion based on the proportion of safe and dangerous discussion. Data were gathered via a postelection random-digit dial telephone survey of residents of a battleground state (N = 600) in November 2004. Three central dependent variables were measured: factual political knowledge, political knowledge structure density, and political participation. The results support the argument that different aspects of political discussion have different implications for different democratic outcomes-and that different conceptualizations and measures of discussion “heterogeneity” produce different results.
39
Edward Simpson · Nature · 1949 · 13.6K citations · Full text
Applied Linear Regression Models
Technometrics · 1997 · 4.7K citations
Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys
Robert M. Groves · Public Opinion Quarterly · 2006 · 2.4K citations
Core Discussion Networks of Americans
Peter V. Marsden · American Sociological Review · 1987 · 1.9K citations