The Incidental Pundit
Who Talks Politics with Whom, and Why
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6231894 |
|---|---|
| Authors | William Minozzi (0000-0001-9147-1788, The Ohio State University), Hyunjin Song (0000-0001-7752-3035, University of Vienna), David Lazer (0000-0002-7991-9110, Universidad del Noreste), David M J Lazer (Northeastern University), Michael A Neblo (0000-0002-6723-0738, The Ohio State University), Katherine Ognyanova (0000-0003-3038-7077, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey) |
| Year | 2020 |
| Volume | 64 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 135-151 |
| Publication date | 2020-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of Political Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0092-5853 • E-ISSN: 1540-5907 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/ajps.12469 |
| OpenAlex | W2974505787 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 45 |
| References cited | 57 |
Informal discussion plays a crucial role in democracy, yet much of its value depends on diversity. We describe two models of political discussion. The purposive model holds that people typically select discussants who are knowledgeable and politically similar to them. The incidental model suggests that people talk politics for mostly idiosyncratic reasons, as by‐products of nonpolitical social processes. To adjudicate between these accounts, we draw on a unique, multisite, panel data set of whole networks, with information about many social relationships, attitudes, and demographics. This evidence permits a stronger foundation for inferences than more common egocentric methods. We find that incidental processes shape discussion networks much more powerfully than purposive ones. Respondents tended to report discussants with whom they share other relationships and characteristics, rather than based on expertise or political similarity, suggesting that stimulating discussion outside of echo chambers may be easier than previously thought
Adjudication · Democracy · Demographics · Diversity (politics · Foundation (evidence · Political science · Politics · Set (abstract data type · Similarity (geometry · Sociology · Value (mathematics · Computer Science · Demography · Electoral Systems and Political Participation · Law · Opinion Dynamics and Social Influence · Psychology · Social Media and Politics · Social Psychology
Do Political Discussion Partners Share Policy Priorities and Policy Frames?
Asymmetric ideological segregation in exposure to political news on Facebook
The Other Divide
Active Is as Active Does
The Social Context of Media Trust
The capricious relationship between technology and democracy
Social Media Misinformation Wars
Living in a Diverse Community
Is Online Textual Political Expression Associated With Political Knowledge
Contagious Politics
The effects of Covid-19 on perceived intergroup competition and negative intergroup outcomes
We Need to Talk
Unintended politics
Same but different
The Civic Culture(s)
The Social Foundations of Public Support for Political Compromise
Becoming political while avoiding politics
The knowledge gap on social media
The Cost of Political Differences to the Peace of Friendship
Linking Facebook User Types With Civic Participation
How reciprocal cooperation between international rivals shapes threat perceptions
Felt respect in political discussions with contrary-minded others
Informal Networked Deliberation
"It’s the Homophily, Stupid!" A Cross-Country Experiment on How Apolitical Similarities Affect Political Conversations in Europe
Using social and behavioural science to support Covid-19 pandemic response
Unpacking the network dynamics of online political discussions
How teams adapt to exogenous shocks
Congress and Community
Is It What You Know or What You Think You Know? Understanding the Roles of Objective and Subjective Political Knowledge in Political Discussion
Mapping Deliberative Systems with Big Data
The promise and peril of interpersonal political communication
Misperceptions of Out-Partisan Anti-Deliberative Attitudes Shape Partisan Affective and Discursive Preferences
A Waste of Time? Partisan Deliberative Bias as a Barrier to Political Crosstalk
Contagion, Confounding, and Causality
Who cares about the public sphere
Separated by Degrees
Networks of Conflict and Cooperation
A Framework for the Study of Persuasion
Parents, Peers and Political Participation
Enraged and Engaged? Emotions as Motives for Discussing Politics
The Role of Self-Threat and Self-Affirmation in Initiation of Political Conversations
Do Political Beliefs Drive Environment Selection
Political network composition predicts vaccination attitudes
Curation Bubbles
How the educational level of confidants impacts our political attitudes
Political Attitudes over the Life Span
Deliberative Democracy between Theory and Practice
Citizens, Politics and Social Communication
Politics with the People
When the People Speak
The Social Citizen
Ergm
Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System
Amelia II
Discrete temporal models of social networks
Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization
Personal Influence
Online Groups and Political Discourse
Beyond Deliberation
Political Discussion Frequency, Network Size, and “Heterogeneity” of Discussion as Predictors of Political Knowledge and Participation
Avoiding Politics
Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure
Hearing the Other Side
Political Attitudes over the Life Span
QAP partialling as a test of spuriousness
Noise, bias, and expertise in political communication networks
Americans are more exposed to difference than we think
Public Deliberation, Discursive Participation, and Citizen Engagement
Theorizing Dialogic Deliberation
Uncovering the Structural Underpinnings of Political Discussion Networks
Weak ties and the core discussion network
Is influence mightier than selection? Forging agreement in political discussion networks during a campaign
Measurement of Political Discussion Networks
From Respondents to Networks
The Deliberative Potential of Political Discussion
Core Discussion Networks of Americans
Disagreement and the Avoidance of Political Discussion
Exponential Random Graph Models for Social Networks
The Workplace as a Context for Cross-Cutting Political Discourse
The Value of Biased Information
Disagreement, Ambivalence, and Engagement
The Coevolution of Networks and Political Attitudes
The “Who” Matters
Expanding the Conversation
Conflict Avoidance and Political Participation
Conversation, Disagreement and Political Participation
A Turn Toward Avoidance? Selective Exposure to Online Political Information, 2004–2008
What Can We Learn from Predictive Modeling
College Socialization and the Economic Views of Affluent Americans
The Electoral Relevance of Political Talk
Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs
The Social Communication of Political Expertise
Real and perceived attitude agreement in social networks
Causality in Political Networks
Why conversation is not the soul of democracy
Social Structural Determinants of Similarity among Associates
The Friendship Group as a Protective Environment for Political Deviants
Who Wants To Deliberate-And Why
Birds of a Feather
| Unique citing works | 45 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 6,43 |
| Citation span | 2019 - 2026 (8) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 44 |