PolS 235: Political Research Methods and Approaches Homework 1 - (Due September 6) Guidelines - This homework assignment counts for 5% of your overall class grade. Bring a hard copy of this assignment to class on September 6. Absolutely no late work accepted. Homework must also be typed. I will not accept hand-written homework assignments. You have to work individually on this assignment! Directions: 1. Look at the abstracts of the academic articles uploaded for Homework 1. a. Decide which article is most interesting to you. b. Now that you have chosen an article, provide a proper citation at the top of your page (APA Style). (10 points) 2. Identify the major parts of the article a. What is the dependent variable(s)? (15 points) b. What are all of the independent variables? (10 points) c. What is the independent variable that the researcher cares most about (i.e. the variable that the theory employs)? (15 points) d. What is the causal theory that connects the independent variable to the dependent variable? (15 points) e. Does this theory seem reasonable to you? (10 points) f. How does the author depict her findings? Graphically? In paragraph form? (10 points) 3. Formulate a testable hypothesis derived from the following causal statement (15 points): Causal Statement: Higher levels of education cause higher levels of careersuccess for a citizen. Hypothesis: University of Utah Is Social Media Changing How We Understand Political Engagement? An Analysis of Facebook and the 2008 Presidential Election Author(s): Juliet E. Carlisle and Robert C. Patton Source: Political Research Quarterly, Vol. 66, No. 4 (DECEMBER 2013), pp. 883-895 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. on behalf of the University of Utah Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23612065 Accessed: 31-08-2016 01:21 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Sage Publications, Inc., University of Utah are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Political Research Quarterly This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Article Political Research Quarterly Is Social Media Changing How We Understand Political Engagement? An Analysis of Facebook and the 2008 66(4) 883-895 © 2013 University of Utah Reprints and permissions: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1065912913482758 prq.sagepub.com Presidential Election Juliet E. Carlisle1 and Robert C. Patton2 Abstract This research conceptualizes political engagement in Facebook and examines the political activity of F during the 2008 presidential primary (Tl) and general election (T2). Using a resource model, we test w helpful in understanding offline political participation also explain political participation in Facebook resources (socioeconomic status [SES]) and political interest and also test whether network size works political activity. We find that individual political activity in Facebook is not as extensive as popular ac Moreover, the predictors associated with the resource model and Putnam's theory of social capital do in Facebook. Keywords Facebook, political participation, 2008 election, social media, social network sites Introduction While the Internet is not a new player in American . . campaigns and elections, the 2008 U.S. presidential cam 6 v ' paign stands out in terms of the prominen There is little doubt that social networking sites (SNS) . , . • . . CXTC such as Facebook have raised the attention of scholars jn particular Facebook interested in social media's effects on the political land- cosponsored with AB scape. In October 2007, roughly one year before the 2008 January 5> ^ and provid U.S. presidential election, Facebook touted more than involyed befor^ fifty million active users with a majority logging onto the ife ^ § poMc&„ applica system at least once a day (Facebook 2009b), and by Qf ^ «application » user August 2008, a little over one month before Election Day, ^ take in d Facebook reached one hundred million active members sœnes pQStings from ABC (Facebook 2010). Social media also played a major role add suppQrt for ^ fayor in the 2012 U.S. presidential election with Facebook cit- tQ vot£ Inasmuch as user ing nine million of its users voting in the November elec- dential debate js unique ti°n (Facebook 2012). Moreover, Facebook and other how SNS; such as Faceb SNS have been used to mobilize individuals to participate politica] participatio in protests around the globe such as the London youth antecedents that predict o riots in the summer of 2011 and the 2009 Iranian protest Qnline participation Fin against the reelection of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and which users engaged th most especially those in the Middle East, collectively referred to as the Arab Spring. Despite popular accounts illustrating the ability of social media to mobilize users ■University of ,daho> Mosco for political activity, little empirical work in the academy 2Moscow, ID, USA has measured the nature of political engagement occur- „ £ -, •> Corresponding Author: ring within these sites. The 2008 U.S. presidential cam- Ju|jet E Car|¡s|e Po|¡tjca| Scien paign, often regarded as the first Facebook election, 875 Perimeter Drive, MS 51 offers an excellent opportunity to address this topic. Email: carlisle@uidaho.edu This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 884 Political Research Quarterly 66(4) 2008 primary and general elections rather th one, isolated event. Using data compiled from questionnaires, school records, and the Facebook user profiles (text, images, applicati spondence, etc.) throughout the 2008 election assess the level of political participation demo college undergraduates and recent graduates i and factors that influence that particip Our research uses a resource model to test same factors helpful in understanding off participation are also useful in explaining participation, especially in the context of F resource model hypothesizes that resource engagement, and recruitment facilitate politi Our model focuses on the first two compo resource model—resources (socioeconomic stat and political engagement (specifically, politica In addition, we test whether network size Putnam (2000) would predict—to increase o political activity. temporary, new media era lowers the cost of accessibility to political information thereby making it more like people are willing and able to invest themselve cally. Some argue that while evidence shows th Scholarly research on the role the Internet has played in Internet facilitates political en civic and political life has mostly followed two trajecto- ment is demonstrated by those alre The Internet and Politics ries. The first considers the manner in which the Internet the Internet has only perpetuated a as a communication tool is used by campaigns, candi- disparities—such as those associat dates, and causes (Bimber and Davis 2003; Foot and race, and age (Bimber and Davis 20 Schneider 2006). The second trajectory seeks to under- and Hughes 1998; Jennings and stand and explain the effects of new media on individual cal engagement, doing little to eng civic and political behavior (Bimber 2003; Drew and cally disengaged (Bimber 199 Weaver 2006; Jennings and Zeitner 2003; Johnson and studies suggest that "[t]he new inform Kaye 2003; Katz and Rice 2002; Shah et al. 2005). has not changed levels of engagemen Understanding how the Internet, in a general sense, affects way" (Bimber 2003, 24). political and civic engagement is indeed important and Another tack in the accessibilit much has been learned from such research. Nevertheless, ment is that the Internet can help there is a gap in our understanding of how online social politically disengaged to becom networks (e.g., Facebook) foster political engagement and The Internet offers convenience an activity. This research seeks to fill this gap. larger swath of citizens, increased a Research on traditional offline social networks sug- online opportunities for political expr gests the important role an individual's social network action, identification and affilia plays in facilitating political engagement. Putnam (1993, citizens, and "the convenience 1995a, 2000) describes how an individual's membership engagement may draw in those d in civic organizations such as the Elk's, bowling leagues, tional modes of political participatio and Rotary serve as conduits to promote political partici- 3). Although research on the effec pation. As the story goes, social networks, such as a tool to organize for political par bowling league, help to foster interpersonal trust and several findings suggest that the Inte cooperation that spreads between and among individuals viduals into political life especially i in these informal social networks and from which spring them to gather political information the potentiality of civic and political engagement that mobilize, and recruit individual serves community and democracy at large in the real because the Internet can significan world. participating (Bonchek 1995, 1997; Johnson and Kaye Bimber (2003, 199) suggests that throughout U.S. 2003; Leizerov 2000; Norris 2000, 200 political history, consecutive information revolutions Shah, Kwak, and Holbert 2001; To This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Carlisle and Patton 885 2003). Clearly, it is les petition or donate mon is to do so offline. that examines the role of social media directly. Notably, SNS and Political Engagement first generation research examined the medium o Internet as a singular technology with the potent influence the passive political actor's behavior While research discussed above contributes to our under- knowledge. We see social med standing of the role the Internet has had with regard to influence but taking it one step furth political engagement, the principal challenge to the above vidual a set of unique tools that en conclusions is that in much of the research the Internet is to actively engage in the public sp viewed as a single, monolithic technology and consider- discusses how the emergence of ing the Internet or Internet use in this broad and general sphere allows individuals to take ad perspective is limiting. Indeed, a component of the ties that make them greater partic Internet that has gained significant attention by users and tion. We believe that social media scholars alike is social media or SNS, such as Facebook. these capabilities that has funda Whereas the findings above suggest that Internet use has landscape in which the user/politic had little if any impact on political engagement, research that social media technologies such of online communities and social networks (Rheingold its infrastructure provides tools to fac 2000, 2002; Schuler and Day 2004; Smith and Kollock First, as (Bond and Fariss et al. 2 1999; Wellman and Haythomthwaite 2002) clearly dem- technology allows individuals the mea onstrates the ability of the Internet to support collective a network of connections but also civic and political actions at local, national, and global influence that network exponentia levels. Indeed, while SNS made their initial appearance (2006) and Jenkins (2006) allude, s during the 2008 elections, according to a recent Pew the costs and boundaries for the in (2011) study, "22% of online adults used Twitter or social cal actor to create and share conten networking sites such as Facebook or MySpace in the environment. We also believe Faceb months leading up to the November, 2010 elections to positioned to facilitate online en connect to the campaign or the election itself." feature-set (e.g., the "newsfeed" and An important step logically here is to move beyond mechanisms to support the indivi generic Internet use and information accessibility to casting political content to a ne understand social media as the locus of online public life online public sphere. and therefore the organizing environment within which Facebook-specific research ha political engagement is substantiated. To do this, we draw the network in the developme from the understanding that the Internet reduces the bar- online community and found pos riers to participation and thus reduces social inequality Steinfield, and Lampe 2006, 2 that exists in public life (Bonchek 1995, 1997; Johnson 2006). For example, Ellison, St and Kaye 2003; Leizerov 2000; Norris 2000, 2004; (2006) examine Facebook usage in Resnick 2004; Shah, Kwak, and Holbert 2001; Tolbert faction with college life across thr and McNeal 2003). We also consider Putnam's concep- tal: bridging, bonding, and high tion of social capital. In the spirit of Putnam, Bourdieu, They find that Facebook plays a sign and Wacquant (1992, 14), we consider social capital as ing barriers to participation in co "the sum of the resources, actual or virtual, that accrue to esteem students and more so than an individual or a group by virtue of possessing a durable self-esteem peers. Ellison, Steinfiel network of more or less institutionalized relationships of 32) also make a significant th mutual acquaintance and recognition" (cited by Ellison, Facebook users, "are using the o Steinfield, and Lampe 2007). In terms of political dis- meet new people than to intensity course, social capital is the consequence of a robust social ships that started offline." life of, "—networks, norms, and trust—enable[ing] par- Extant research in offline soc ticipants to act together more effectively to pursue shared gests that network size can increase objectives" (Putnam 1995b, 664-65). Therefore, we individual will come in contact wit expect social capital to have a positive effect in its ability active individuals, thereby having a p to foster greater commitment to active political participa- person's likelihood to partici tion both offline as well as within online social Leighley 1990; Verba, Schlozman, networks. Facebook can foster social capital and larger networks This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 886 Political foster Research political Quarterly participation, it 66(4) seems Facebook, due to the ability of users to maintain large networks, will facilitate like easily partic users with larger networks than those with networks. ated by the social capital created by using social media, it A frequent criticism leveled at youth is that they are seems possible that Fac increasingly and disproportionately disengaged from pol- [online] political engagem itics as a result of their position in the life cycle (Loader gap by mobilizing those w 2007; Strate et al. 1989; Verba and Nie 1987; Zukin et al. ticipation too high, and stim 2006). Yet, with young Americans more quick to embrace ical activities that perhaps the advances in Internet technologies than any other environment than they cohort and the overwhelming propensity, 70 percent of ment. Thus, our study eighteen- to twenty-five-year-olds perceiving the Internet research questions: as a "useful source of political and issue information" versus the 48 percent of those over twenty-five (Delli . _ ,. .... Carpini 2000; see also Pew 20111) demonstrates the need Research Questionl- W to investigate youth, new media, and the effects on politi- participation offered cal participation. Increasing usage rates within SNS est response to the increa among the young and the perception that social media Pres'^cnt'a' camP were instrumental in engaging youth during the 2008 Research Question 2\ Ho election, our research has practical relevance and impli- participation such as cations for political mobilization and engagement in work with regard American politics. Facebook? Finally, scholars have long considered elections and the stimuli they provide as important to voter mobil tion. For example, Campbell's (1960) hypothesis of sur and decline suggests that the short-term force of inform tion that flows in the context of an election influences voter turnout. Due to the fact that presidential elections 0ur measure of online activity considers both new and produce a greater deal of new information in addition to °'d m°des of engagement but it considers them in an the overall symbolic importance of a presidential elec- online environment. We do consider aspects of offline tion, we suspect that Facebook is no different insofar as engagement, such as voting or attending a meeting or mobilization or activity is concerned. However, we are rady, for example, but we focus on the nature of online curious as to what particular forms of participation expe- political engagement, the correlates of online political rience the largest response to the increasing intensity of engagement, and whether online engagement is merely the campaign. offline engagement in a digital space or is online engage A unique aspect to our study is that while many schol- ment altogether different. We suspect that there ar ars have suggested that the Internet fosters offline politi- or evolving forms of political engagement that h cal engagement by reducing the associated cost, we adapted to a digital environment and if this is th suggest that the Internet, social media, more specifically, these new forms that are showing up in a digital can also foster online political engagement by reducing sucb as Facebook, have value in and of themsel the cost to participate and, perhaps, even more than it are worthy of investigation, would for offline engagement, given the unique features SNS such as Facebook provide users. It is one thing for Data and Measures an individual to use the Internet to gather information about an issue but another to then use that information to The data for this study come from two sources. Fi fuel offline engagement. The cost of gathering the infor- were collected from student surveys and school r mation is reduced but the cost of the offline behavior of University of California undergraduates enr resulting from that information is unchanged. However, sixteen real-time general education courses b if one were to use the Internet to gather information and September 2003 and June 2007 (N = 1,014). Second then by a mere click of a mouse, join an online protest, expand the above data set with additional data meas sign an online petition, recruit a friend to join a cause via political engagement collected via content an his or her network connections, or donate money via Facebook user profiles of those participants in our sam online contribution form, the cost of participating is who have "open" (or public) profiles. With part This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Carlisle and Patton 887 permission, we match Facebook profiles an profiles and also note (public) or closed (priv the effects of the 200 engagement, this resea measure the change i Facebook, over the co mary and general elect content analyze Faceb time: (1) in January (February 5,2008), an the general election (N students who particip mately 460 maintaine approximately 326 at T ticipant or decay with a li Independent Variables altogether deleting With regard to our re mined via /-tests on a the only significant d Facebook profiles and regard to the number files, on average, had than those with /(709) = 2.295, p of those who open = .02 closed th graduated, were enteri to keep that which hap altogether profiles. closed However, the test to year in school. Schlozman et al. 1995; Wolfinger and Rosenstone 1980). Content analysis was carried out by two undergraduate With regard to network size, there are diff students who were trained and provided with a codebook3 the manner in which scholars have operatio and archived copies of participant Facebook profiles. from number of "discussant generators" (H Intercoder reliability4 was established to be nearly 90 per- Sprague 1995) or the number of people wit cent. Facebook profiles were coded for the presence or individual discusses politics (Kwak et al. 2 number of just under fifty (mostly political) characteris- measure of network size, we include a raw c tics. As a result of the near impossibility to predict the number of Facebook "friends" a particular us totality of images, groups, words, and terms that could be the number of groups to which the user belo coded into our categories, we implemented a general rule to code text and/or images as belonging to a particular Limitations category (Nachmias and Nachmias 1987).5 There are a few limitations to our study worth discussing Dependent Variables First, our sample was drawn from a population of stu dents at a large, public university in California. While th For our dependent variables, we create a simple additive stage of the sample is most likely represent index of political activity (0-12) constructed from thir- lege students in general, the second stage of teen dichotomous variables that indicate whether the par- includes only those students from the fir ticipant engaged in a particular political activity. A high maintain a public profile on Facebook. As a score indicates the individual is more politically active. could very well be an issue of bias due t The political activity index includes a variety of political insofar as the students who maintain a pub activities6 occurring within the Facebook environment, profile might differ significantly from tho including political discussion (as indicated by number of do not have a Facebook profile or have This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 888 Political Table I. Research Political Quarterly Activity on Facebook Primary Political Activity Index3 (a = .70) Profile picture Political events Political notes Posted items 66(4) Primary General election election M or % (n) M or %(n) 0.24 (450) 2% (9) 2% (7) 0.7% (3) 1.48 (304) 0.3% (l)b 8% (25)b 1% (6) 1.0% (3) 0.7% (2)b Political discussion (on the wall) 3% (13) 18% (54)b Political status update 2% (9) 14% (42)b 0.4% (2) 2% (8) 5% (23) 4% (19) 2% (9) 2% (7) 15% (45)b Voted or intends to vote Candidate support Political applications Political "causes" Donate to political cause(s) Recruit other to join political cause P II an Ln 00 12% (35)b 8% (24)b 7% (20) 0.7% (2) 0.3% (1) a = .72 at(4l I) = -7.149, p = .000. indicates significant difference between primary and general elections for each individual activity according to independent-samples t-test. R of individual t-tests are available upon request. profile. Generalizations, therefore, should be made with so, to identify the antecedent variables of that politic care. A second limitation is that our sample comprises activity, including those associated with Putnam's theory students who completed a lower division undergraduate of network size as well as those associated with course offered by one of four specific academic depart- resource model. Also, we assess the forms of online po ments: computer science, psychology, history, and/or ical participation in Facebook that yield the lar writing, which some might argue yield an unrepresenta- response to the increasing intensity of the campaign tive sample. However, these are large, introductory the primary to general election. To begin with this p classes that likely capture a cross section of the student the analysis, we first consider the nature of political a population. Finally, one of the joyously frustrating aspects ity in Facebook. We assume that Facebook users wil of conducting live web and Facebook research is that it is more active politically at T2 (the general election) th essentially trying to shoot the proverbial moving target. T1 (the primary election). Indeed, according to the re Over the course of the year between T1 and T2 when we of our independent-samples i-test, presented in Table captured Facebook data, Facebook underwent a signifi- there is a statistically reliable difference in the lev cant two-step interface modification, the first of which political activity for the primary election (M= 0.24, S occurred in July 2008 when Facebook launched the 0.7056) and the general election (M= 1.399, SD = 1.4 optional beta interface for "the new" Facebook, and in *(752) = —7.149,/»= .000.10 September when all users were officially migrated to the Moreover, our /-tests reveal statistically signif new interface. While we were able to adjust our archival differences for particular types of political participat technique to mitigate any threats to our data and what we between the two elections. Table 1 also contains the were able to collect, we cannot guarantee that there was all level of participation for each election as well as th no effect on what we captured and thus coded. The nature level of change among specific political activities th of data collection between T1 and T2 as referred to above comprise the political activity index. For the primary can also account for participant profile modifications election, political activity was not all that extraordi where content deletion, editing, and securing one's pro- The specific political activities in which a larger propo file become commonplace in particular as Facebook's tion of users were engaged include political applicat interface changes were highly publicized and profile political causes, and political discussion with 5, 4, a security was highlighted in the media. percent of our sample, respectively, engaging in t activities. Only 0.4 percent of our sample voted or Results intended to vote during the primary election according to their Facebook profiles. In contrast, the specific political The purpose of our study is to understand whether activities during the general election in which mo Facebook users are politically active in Facebook and, if participated include political discussion, politica This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Carlisle and Patton 889 updates, votes or intends to vote, and supports a candi POLITICAL ACTIVITY IN FACEBOOK 2008 Primary Election vs. General date. The proportion of our sample who participated in Election political discussion and political status updates both jumped more than 15 percent from the primary to the general election. The increase in candidate support and political events was less at 10 and 6 percent, respectively. Cycle Time ■ Primary T1 □ H General General T2T2 The smallest increase was among those who joined a "political cause," showing only a 2-percent increase from the primary to the general election. For a few activities, participation declined from the primary to the general election. Donating money to and recruiting others to join a political cause both declined over the course of the elec tion, which is counterintuitive to offline political engage ment. However, the difference for these two activities was not statistically significant, according to our /-tests. aaa—r®—i ™ F i-r~—i— i 1 Only politically oriented profile pictures and posted items 0 0.00 00 1.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 3.00 3.00 4.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 proved to show a statistically significant decrease Political Activity between the primary and general elections. Figureis I. that Frequency of political activity duri What the reader should note, however, political Figure I. Frequency elections. activity during either election was and not general altogether remark- and general elec able. As Figure 1 shows, Facebook during the 2008 presi dential election was not the hotbed of political activity regard tQ p that popular accounts may have us believe. During both Facebook the primary and general elections, users were more likely Tuming t to be nonactive politically than they were to be politically ordinary least active. Nevertheless, we do see that several types of polit- predictors, inc ical activities increased over the course of the election. of participatio This finding conforms to our expectation that an election, and on a s in particular the general election with its impressive sym- including voti bolic importance and attention, is more likely to attract basedu acts (our the attention of individuals and mobilize those acts). Table 2 presen individuals to partake in political action especially with primary elec Table 2. Regression Model of Political Participation among Facebook Users durin Election Primary Variable Coefficient (SE) Constant 0.67 (1.18) 0.09 (0.21) -0.09 (0.10) 0.05 (0.07) -0.45* (0.21) 0.29 (0.16) 0.86*** (0.20) -0.05 (0.28) 0.09 (0.08) -0.18** (0.07) -.005 (0.12) -0.36* (0.18) Sex (male) Age Parental income (low to high) Race (white) Political ideology (conservative high) Political interest (interest high) GPA SAT (verbal) SAT (math) Number of friends Group membership R2 = .47 * p < .05. **p < .05. **f> < .01. ***p < .001. compare differences that the predictors might have for the election, nonwhites are more likely to be politically active different elections. Again, it is our purpose to assess the on Facebook than are whites (P = -.45 and p = .04). The nature of the impact that standard predictors associated effect of race is insignificant for the general election, with participation have with regard to participation in however. Facebook. Specifically, we compare those associated In considering Putnam's model, we predict a positive with the resource model against those of network size à la and significant relationship between network size (num Putman. The results demonstrate that by and large many ber of friends and group membership) and political par of the variables considered usual suspects and likely to ticipation. We find that the number of Facebook "friends" contribute to political participation do not carry the same a user has is not significantly related to political participa relationship to political activity in a Facebook environ- tion, contradicting our expectation on the effect of net ment. In fact, in Table 2, two of the "big three" standard work size. Moreover, our results demonstrate the direction predictors of political activity (sex and parental income) of the relationship to be opposite of our expectations so do not prove to be significantly related to political activ- that those with more friends are less likely to be politi ity in Facebook and race is only significant for the pri- cally active. This suggests that collecting friends or build mary election. Overall, our model explains approximately ing one's social network in Facebook is an independent 47 and 63 percent of the variance in political activity dur- activity undertaken by users who are less inclined to be ing the 2008 primary and general elections, respectively. politically engaged with that network. While group mem The resource model of political participation predicts bership fails to reach statistical significance for the gen that income and interest drive political participation. Our eral election, it does prove statistically significant for the findings are mixed. In Table 2, parental income, while in primary election. However, the direction of the effect is the expected direction, lacks statistical significance in our also opposite of what we predicted. That is, the results models. Nevertheless, the impact of political interest demonstrate that the more Facebook groups to which a proves positive and significant so that those Facebook member belongs, the less likely the person is to partici users who are more interested in politics are more likely pate politically in Facebook. SNS "friends" and network to participate via Facebook during the primary and gen- do not seem to offer the same sorts of benefits that real eral elections ((3 = .86 and p = .000, P = 3.45 andp = .02, life friends do in terms of developing the type of social respectively). Overall, political interest has the strongest capital needed to nurture political engagement. Our impact of all the predictors. In addition, it is worth includ- results demonstrate that perhaps SNS such as Facebook, ing race with our discussion of the resource model as race in line with the findings of Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe is often correlated with (SES) factors that drive participa- (2007), generate bridging capital rather than the bonding tion. Our results demonstrate that for the primary capital explained in Putnam's theory of social capital. This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms in Carlisle Like and Patton resource 891 theory, our mixed. activities, voting, political donations, and political dis The final variable that proves significant is SAT (math) cussion, respectively, and we see that for the primary election the overall impact is slight and the direction is negative thereby demonstrat Conclusion ing that those who perform better in math standardized tests are less likely to be politically active. We attribute For several years, scholar this finding to the fact that SAT math (and verbal), like understand the relationship be college major, offers a quick and dirty categorization into tion and political engagement which we can divide college students, which, as a qualita- research is better understandi five difference, might accompany different majors media technologies are approp (Jennings 1993). In line with Jennings' findings, we infer political purposes. Our resear that those who earned higher scores on SAT (m) are gen- we seek to identify how indiv erally less politically active and therefore less likely themselves with social media, interested in and mobilized by the primary election cam- We seek to understand wheth paign as born out by our results. politics in unique ways in Facebook and/or if the corre In Table 3, we disaggregate our political activity index lates of traditional offline political engagement stand true to include time-based activities, voting, political dona- in this new environment. tions, and political discussion. Using standard OLS The 2008 presidential election provides the unique regression and pooled data, we find two things worthy of opportunity to empirically investigate the nature of politi note. First, in terms of voting and political contributions, cal engagement in Facebook. First, because the 2008 none of the predictors demonstrate statistical signifi- election was the first election in which Facebook had cance. While this is not altogether surprising in light of existed as a thoroughly diffuse cultural medium. And see the results presented in Table 2 and discussed above, we ond, by the 2008 presidential campaign, with more than had expected at least political interest to prove signifi- one hundred million active users, Facebook was generat cant. We do not know whether lack of significance is the ing national attention from both major political parties, result of Facebook equalizing the participation playing candidates, and national media outlets as a tool to mobi field or due to the low number of users who actually par- lize active political engagement. What we have found, ticipated in either activity. Second, we find that overall however, is that despite the enthusiasm surrounding political interest is significantly associated with time- Facebook, individuals in general engaged in limited based activities and political discussion ((3 = .76 and p = political activity via Facebook during the 2008 presiden .001, P = .90 and p = .000), respectively. As well, sex is tial campaign cycle. Despite limited overall engagement, significantly and positively related to time-based activi- we confirm the general election acted as the driving force ties so that males are more likely to participate in time- for individual engagement within Facebook, especially based activities than are females (P = .50 and p = .02). with regard to particular behaviors such as political dis While sex fails to reach significance for the other political cussion, political status updates, advertising one's inten activities, it just barely misses for voting and political dis- tion to vote or that they voted, and support for a candidate, cussion. We assume, based on the civic volunteerism Finally, we find that one's political interests play a sig model, a positive relationship between parental income nificant role in determining whether an individual is more and political donations, and while the relationship is posi- or less engaged in Facebook during both the primary and tive, it fails to reach statistical significance. However, general elections. The significance and strength of the parental income is positively and significantly related to effect of political interest is in line with previous research time-based activities (P = .17 and p = .02). It seems likely both in the area of traditional offline political activity and the benefits of parental income bestowed to one's off- online behavior, in general. While many have considered spring during the formative years carries over into col- whether the Internet can equalize access to information lege with respect to political participation, in a more and politics, we find, as have others, that interest propels general sense. However, mom and dad's money is their action. Those who are more interested are those who are money and it seems that what is theirs has no significant more likely to be engaged and politically active, influence on what their college-aged offspring has and Interestingly, our findings suggest that Facebook can do with regard to political donations. While group political engagement may be unique in that very few of membership is in the positive direction for time-based the traditional predictors of offline political engagement activities, voting, and political discussion, it fails to reach instantiate themselves within the SNS space, with two statistical significance in all three, although only barely notable exceptions. First, our analyses do show that the misses for political discussion. In terms of the four number of Facebook friends one has bears no relation on This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 892 Political political Research Quarterly 66(4) It is ourwhich belief that continued research into the political co participation, in essence lifepremise, of Facebook users is yet relevant and important,may espe Putnam's social capital there cially as the technology evolvesand and more users join to believe there are both practical concep ences between "Facebook" friends traditional Facebook, which currentlyand reports more than one billion active users (Facebook 2013). As citizens, while the number of groups to campaign which strategists and candidatesits becomedirection more familiar with i belongs does yield significance, to use second Facebook as a toolexception for political engagement, it t of what we expected. how The is is likely that Facebook will become more embeddedmo into ities, at least in the primary election, were political landscape. is clearly the case seen participate politically the than wereThis whites. Inas add However, results demonstrate since that the 2008individuals presidential election, Facebook with has con h tinued to beengaged a presence for political activity in the 2010 aptitude tend to be significant midterm and 2012 presidential If and as the and of itself, the finding might not elections. be earth shat when compared with ranks Carlisle of active political and Facebook Patton's users become more (20 established, in the long term, weprofile firmly anticipate a ses of who maintains a Facebook interaction to be a standard to measureSAT of online Hillygus (2005) finds Facebook with regard scor political activity. To what extent citizens will ultimately science curriculum, and political engagement, engage with each other using Facebook or another new olate that our findings support her civic educat esis, insofar as political technology andparticipants how that differs from their offline engage who Facebook user profiles ment and exhibit the political system higher is an open question verba for math research. tude and backgroundsfuture in the social sciences. Finally, and the most important takeaway, wh tend to view the Internet Acknowledgments and new technologi that can easily enrichWeand nourish would like to acknowledge Drs. civic Bmce Bimber,and Richard po research has mainly real life are translated and carried over into online life revealed that ineq Mayer, Kevin Almeroth, and Dorothyexisting Chun at the University of California, Santa Barbara, for graciously providing access to the data for this research—data that were derived from their Andrew creating a digital divide that exists as a result of the inter play of national, institutional, and individual characterisW. Mellon Foundation funded research grant titled "Assessing tics. Our research reveals that some of the traditional the Pedagogic Implications of Technology in the Classroom." We are also grateful for the assistance of Whitney Richardson predictors that create differentials in political engage and Ryan Sargent who carried out the content analysis compo ment, most notably parental income, sex, and race/ethnic nent of our project. Thank you to Eric R. A. N. Smith, M. Kent ity, do not appear relevant in the Facebook context. And, Jennings, Bruce Bimber, and Anand Sokhey for providing feed if they do (e.g., race), they tend to benefit those who are back and assistance with previous drafts. generally less likely to participate (e.g., minorities). We find this to indicate that perhaps Facebook is leveling the Declaration of Conflicting Interests playing field and allowing those who might lack the resources to participate in a conventional sense, theThe abilauthor(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this ity to participate in a digital sense. Nevertheless, we are article. slightly concerned that there exist significant demo graphic and individual-level differences between those Funding who use Facebook and those who do not (especially with The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup regard to parental income, ethnicity, and SAT (verbal); for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this arti Carlisle and Patton 2009). It is important to note port that cle: Financial support for the most recent data collection used while there does exist a slight divide related to parental here was funded by a seed grant from National Science income, it does not negatively affect those in the lowest Foundation (NSF) SBE-0620073, ADVANCE grant awarded to parental income brackets, but rather those students in the Idaho State University. middle-income bracket. Still, we see that in general more students from the highest parental income category Notes are Facebook users. This leveling of the playing field in 1. A Pew (2011 ) survey finds that "[d]emographically, politi Facebook political engagement may likely be the result cal social media users are younger and somewhat more of two factors. The first is that the university provides each registered student with an e-mail address andeducated Internet access, and second, that Facebook is a free net working service where the only barrier to access is an e-mail address and Internet access. than other internet users .. . [but] they look quite similar to the rest of the online population in their racial, gender and income composition." 2. The actual task of capturing the Facebook profiles for Time 2, the general election, was unintentionally interrupted This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Carlisle and Patton 893 and, as a result, it took a Benkler, Yochai. 2006. The Wealth of Networks: How Socia plete the task. ProductionAbout Transforms Markets and half Freedom. Boston: captured in late October and Yale University Press. ing profiles Best, were captured Samuel J., and Brian S. Krueger. 2005. "Analyzing the early December. While Representativeness of Internet Politicalthos Participation." contain additional activ Political Behavior 27 user (2): 183-216. and upcoming inauguration Bimber, Bruce. 1999. "The Internet and Citizen Communication with Government: Does the Medium Matter?" Political able to capture the Facebook prior to the general election Communication 16 (4): 409-29. able to expand Facebook pro Bimber, Bruce. 2001. "Information and Political Engagement America: The Search for Effects of Information we are quite inconfident the ously compromise our data Technology at the Individual Level." Political Research the fact prior of that some of Quarterly 54 (1): 53-67. the cap to theBimber, election, it is q Bruce. 2003. Information and American Democracy: political activity Technology in the Evolution ofis Political sligh Power. Cambridge: were the significantly more acti Cambridge University Press. election. However, Bimber, Bruce, and Richard Davis. 2003. this Campaigning primary and Online: general electio The Internet in U.S. Elections. New York: Oxford contained prior to profiles that we University Press. either election. Bonchek, Mark. 1995. "Grassroots in Cyberspace: Recruiting 3. Codebook is available up Members on the Internet or Do Computer Networks 4. The authors estimate co Facilitate Collective Action? A Transaction Cost which exceeds the baseline Approach." Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meet 2002). The centage 5. For files, intercoder reliab of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, agreement. April 6-8. more Bonchek, detail on our c Mark. 1997. From Broadcast to Netcast: The Internet see Content and the Flow of Political Information,Analys PhD diss., Harvard http://prq.sagepub.corn/sup University. 6. at 7. See Table 1Robert (dependent v Bond, M., Christopher J. Fariss, Jason J. Jones, Adam http://prq.sagepub.com/s D.I. Kramer, Cameron Marlow, Jaime E. Settle, and James The request. coding scheme H. Fowler 2012. "A 61-million-person experiment in social 8. Some may argue that as our sample is college-aged, paren tal income has little explanatory relevance. We disagree. We consider the socialization influence that parents have on their children, especially income (and socioeconomic status [SES]) associated with one's upbringing. This effect does not altogether end once one leaves the nest. Values, attitudes, and behaviors associated with the milieu of one's upbringing can have long-term effect. 9. An additive index (0-5) constructed from dummy codes of the following indicators as measured via content analysis of Facebook profiles for a mention of a politically relevant item in the following Facebook categories: activities, inter ests, television shows, movies, and books. The reliability (Cronbach's a) of the political interest index is .49. 10. For a presentation of descriptive data and discussion on our sample, please see supplemental materials at http://prq. sagepub.com/supplemental. 11. Verba, Schlozman, and Brady (1995) use a similar mea surement and refer to it as "Time-based" acts. For consis tency, we use the same terminology. References of influence and political mobilization." Nature 489:295-298. Boulianne, Shelley. 2009. "Does Internet Use Affect Engagement? A Meta-analysis of Research." Political Communication 26 (2): 193-211. Bourdieu, Pierre, and Loïc Wacquant. 1992. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brady, Henry E., Sidney Verba, and Kay L. Schlozman, 1995. "Beyond SES: A Resource Model of Political Participation." The American Political Science Review 89 (2): 271-94. Campbell, Angus. 1960. "Surge and Decline: A Study of Electoral Change." In Elections and the Political Order, edited by Angus Campbell, Philip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes, 40-62. New York: Wiley. Carlisle, Juliet E., and Rob Patton. 2009. "Facebook and Political Engagement During the 2008 Presidential Campaign." Paper delivered at the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. Toronto, Ontario, Canada, September 3-6. Davis, Richard. 1999. The Web of Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Delli Carpini, Michael. 2000. "Gen.com: Youth, Civic Engagement, and the New Information Environment." Political Communication 17 (4): 341-49. Abramson, Paul, John Aldrich, and David Rohde. 2006. Change Drew, Dan, and David Weaver. 2006. "Voter Learning in and Continuity in the 2004 Elections. Washington, DC: The 2004 Presidential Election: Did The Media Matter?" Congressional Quarterly Press. This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 894 Political Research Quarterly 66(4) Structural Features of Political Talk and Discussion Communication Quarterly 83 Engagement." Communication Research 32 (1): 88-1 Ellison, Nicole, Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. Leighley, 2006. Jan. 1990. "Social Interaction and Contex "Spatially Bounded Online Social Networks and SocialInfluences on Political Participation." American Pol Capital: The Role of Facebook. " Paper presented at the Quarterly 18:459-75. Annual Meeting of the International Communication Leizerov, Sagi. 2000. "Privacy Advocacy Groups Versus Association, Dresden, Germany, 2006. https://www.msu. A Case Study of How Social Movements are Tacti edu/~nellison/Facebook_ICA_2006.pdf. Using the Internet to Fight Corporations." Social Sc Ellison, Nicole, Charles Steinfield, and Cliff Lampe. 2007. "The Computer Review 18 (4): 461-83. Benefits of Facebook 'Friends': Social Capital and College Loader, Brian. 2007. Young Citizens in the Digital Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites." Journal Political Engagement, Young People and New M of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (4): Article 1. London: Routledge. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/voll2/issue4/ellison.html. Luskin, Robert C. 1990. "Explaining Political Sophistic Facebook. 2009a. "Facebook Announcement: Facebook/ABC Political Behavior 12 (4): 331-61. Nachmias, David, and Chava Nachmias. 1987. Research News Election 08." http://www.facebook.com/press/ Methods in the Social Sciences. 3rd ed. New York: St. releases.php?p=12926. Martin's Press. Facebook. 2009b. "Facebook Timeline." http://newsroom. Journalism & Mass 25-42. fb.com/Timeline. Neuendorf, Kimberly. 2002. The Content Analysis Guidebook. Facebook. 2010. "Facebook Timeline." http://newsroom.Thousand fb.com/Timeline. Oaks: SAGE. Niemi, Richard, and Jane Junn. 1998. Civic Education: What Facebook. 2012. "The 2012 Election Day through the Facebook Makes Students Learn. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lens." http://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-data-sci Nisbet, Matthew C., and Dietram A. Scheufele 2004. "Political ence/the-2012-election-day-through-the-facebook Talk as a Catalyst for Online Citizenship." Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 81 (4): 877-96. lens/10151181043778859. Facebook. 2013. "Facebook Timeline." http://newsroom. Norris, Pippa. 1999. "Who Surfs? New Technology, Old fb.com/Timeline. Voters and Virtual Democracy." In democracy.com, edited Foot, Kristen, and Steven Schneider. 2006. Web Campaigning. Cambridge: MIT Press. by E. C. Kamarck & J. S. Nye, 71-94. New Hampshire: Hollis. Hess, Robert, and Judith Tomey. 1967. The Development ofNorris, Pippa. 2000. A Virtuous Circle: Political Political Attitudes in Children. Chicago: Aldine. Communications in Postindustrial Societies. Cambridge: Hill, Kevin, and John Hughes. 1998. Cyberpolitics: Citizen Cambridge University Press. Activism in the Age of the Internet. Lanham: Rowman & Norris, Pippa. 2004. "The Bridging and Bonding Role of Online Littlefield. Communities." In Society Online: The Internet in Context, Hillygus, D.Sunshine. 2005. "The Missing Link: Exploring edited by P. N. Howard & S. Jones, 31-41. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. the Relationship between Higher Education and Political Engagement." Political Behavior 27 (1): 25-47. Pew. 2011. "22% of Online Americans Used Social Networking Huckfeldt, Robert, and John Sprague. 1995. Citizens, Politics and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press. or Twitter for Politics in 2010 Campaign." http://pewinter net.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2011/PIP-Social-Media and-2010-Election.pdf. Putnam, Robert. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Jenkins, Henry. 2006 Convergence Culture: Where Old and Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press. New Media Collide. Cambridge: MIT Press. Jennings, M.Kent. 1993. "Education and Political Development Putnam, Robert. 1995a. "Bowling Alone: America's Declining among Young Adults." Politics and the Individual 3 (2): Social Capital." Journal of Democracy 6 (1): 65-78. 1-24. Putnam, Robert. 1995b. "Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Jennings, M.Kent, and Vicki Zeitner. 2003. "Internet Use and Disappearance of Social Capital in America." Political Civic Engagement: A Longitudinal Analysis." Public Science and Politics 28 (4): 664-83. Putnam, Robert. 2000. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Johnson, Thomas J., and Barbara K. Kaye. 2003. "A Boost or Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Opinion Quarterly 67 (3): 311-34. a Bust for Democracy? How the Web Influenced Political Schuster. Attitudes and Behaviors in the 1996 and 2000 Presidential Resnick, Paul. 2004. "Impersonal Sociotechnical Capital, ICTs, Elections." Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics and Collective Action among Strangers." In Transforming 8 (3): 9-34. Katz, James E., and Ronald Rice. 2002. Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement and Interaction. Cambridge: MIT Press. Kwak, Nojin, Ann E. Williams, Xiarou Wang, and Hoon Lee. 2005. "Talking Politics and Engaging Politics: An Examination of the Interactive Relationships between Enterprise, edited by W. Dutton, B. Kahin, R. O'Callaghan, and A. Wyckoff, 486-99. Boston: MIT Press. Rheingold, Howard. 2000. The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. Rev. ed. Cambridge: MIT Press. Rheingold, Howard. 2002. Smart Mobs: The Next Social Revolution. Cambridge: Perseus Publishing. This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Carlisle and Patton 895 Participation." American Political Science Review Schlozman, Voting Kay L., Nan 83:443-64. Donahue. 1995. "Gende There a Different Tolbert, Caroline, and Ramona McNeal.Voice 2003. "Unraveling th Science 39 Effects (2): 267-93. of the Internet on Political Participation." Politica Research Quarterly 56 (2): 175-85. Schuler, Douglas, and Pe Vanden Boogart, Matthew. 2006. Uncovering the Social Society: The New Role Impacts of Facebook on aPress. College Campus, Master's th Cambridge: MIT Shah, Dhavan sis, Kansas State V., University, http://krex.k-state.edu/dspace Jaeho handle/2097/181. Kwak. 2005. "Informat Verba, Sidney, and Norman Nie. 1987. Participation in Age: Modeling Internet Communication America: Political Democracy Researc and Social Equality. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. Shah, Dhavan V., Jaeh Gotlieb, Hyunseo Verba, Sidney, Kay Schlozman, and Henry Brady. Hwa 1995. Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. School, and Douglas M. McLeod. 2007. "Campaign Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Ads, Online Messaging, and Participation: Extending Wellman, Barry, and Caroline Haythornthwaite. eds. 2002. The the Communication Mediation Model." Journal of Communication 57 (4): 676-703. Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Shah, Dhavan V., Nojin Kwak, and R. Lance Holbert. 2001. Wolfinger, Raymond and Steven Rosenstone. 1980. Who Votes? New Haven: Yale University Press. "Connecting and Disconnecting with Civic Life: Patterns of Internet Use and the Production of Social Capital." Xenos, Micahel, and Patricia Moy. 2007. "Direct and Political Communication 18:141—62. Differential Effects of the Internet on Political and Civic Smith, Mark, and Peter Kollock. eds. 1999. Communities Engagement." Journal of Communication 57 (4): 704-18. in Cyberspace: Perspectives on New Forms of SocialZukin, Cliff, Scott Keeter, Molly Andolina, Krista Jenkins, and Michael Delli Carpini. 2006. A New Engagement?: Organization. London: Routledge. Strate, John M., Charles J. Parrish, Charles D. Elder, and I. Political Participation, Civic Life, and the Changing Coit Ford, II. 1989. "Life Span Civic Development and American Citizen. New York: Oxford University Press. This content downloaded from 128.192.114.19 on Wed, 31 Aug 2016 01:21:16 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Purchase answer to see full attachment