Restricted accessOtherFirst published online 2011-6
Kids These Days: Examining Differences in Political Uses and Gratifications,Internet Political Participation,Political Information Efficacy,and Cynicism on the Basis of Age
Using a telephone survey of randomly selected voters from the general population, the authors sought to understand the interrelatedness of the use of the Internet as a political information source with perception of political participation, political information efficacy, and cynicism. Guided by the uses and gratifications theory and employing the Political Media Gratifications Scale, the authors examine these constructs in terms of emergent generational differences. Findings indicate that digital natives differ from their older voting counterparts, and the researchers conclude more research must investigate further to accurate determine meaning.
Ansolabehere, S., & Iyengar, S. ( 1995). Going negative: How political advertisements shrink and polarize the electorate. New York, NY: Free Press
2.
Blumler, J.G., & McQuail, D. ( 1969). Television in politics: Its uses and influence. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Breakthrough Thinking. (2006). Young people not interested in politics: Study. Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at the University of Maryland. Retrieved from http://www.impactlab.com
4.
Cappella, J.N., & Jamieson, K.H. (1997). Spiral of cynicism: The press and the public good. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
5.
Delli Carpini, M.X. ( 2000). Gen.com: Youth, civic engagement, and the new information environment. Political Communication, 17, 341-349.
6.
de Vreese, C.H. ( 2005). The spiral of cynicism reconsidered. European Journal of Communication, 20, 283-301.
7.
Garramone, G.M., Harris, A.C., & Anderson, R. ( 1986). Uses of political computer bulletin boards. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 30, 325-339.
8.
Hart, R.P. ( 1994). Seducing America: How television charms the American voter (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
9.
Hibbing, J.R., & Theiss-Moore, E. (1995). The media’s role in public negativity towards Congress: Distinguishing emotional reactions and cognitive evaluations. American Journal of Political Science , 42, 475-498.
10.
Kaid, L.L., Landreville, K.D., Postelnicu, M., & Martin, J.D. ( 2005, May). Enhancing information efficacy for young voters: The effects of political advertising and debates. Paper presented to the International Communication Association, Political Communication Division. New York City, New York.
11.
Kaid, L.L., McKinney, M., & Tedesco, J. ( 2000). Civic dialogue in the 1996 presidential campaign: Candidate, media, and public voices. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
12.
Kaid, L.L., McKinney, M.S., & Tedesco, J.C. ( 2004, November). Information efficacy and young voters. Papers presented at the National Communication Conference, Chicago, IL.
13.
Kaid, L.L., McKinney, M.S., & Tedesco, J.C. ( 2007). Political information efficacy and young voters. American Behavioral Scientist, 50, 1093-1111.
14.
Kaid, L.L., & Postelnicu, M. (2005). Political advertising and the responses of young voters: Comparison of traditional television and Internet messages. American Behavioral Scientist, 49, 265-278.
15.
Kaid, L.L., Postelnicu, M., Landreville, K.D., Yun, H.J., & LeGrange, A.G. (2007). The effects of political advertising on young voters. American Behavioral Scientist , 50, 1137-1151.
16.
Kaye, B.K., & Johnson, T.J. ( 2002). Online and in the know: Uses and gratifications of the Web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46, 54-71.
17.
Kim, H., Tinkham, S.F., & Lariscy, R.W. ( 2007, June). Public policies and political advertising: What do source disclosure, message valence, and repetition achieve?Paper presented at the annual conference of the Marketing and Public Policy, Washington, DC.
18.
Lazarsfeld, P.F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. ( 1968). The people’s choice: How the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.
19.
McLeod, J.M., & Becker, L.B. ( 1974). Testing the validity of gratifications measures through political effects analysis. In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 137-164). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
20.
Mulder, R.D. ( 1978). The political effects of the Carter-Ford debate: An experimental analysis. Sociological Focus, 11, 33-45.
21.
NonprofitVOTE. (2009). Voter turnout, 2008. Retrieved from http://www.nonprofitvote.org
22.
Norris, P. ( 2000). A virtuous circle: Political communications in postindustrial societies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23.
Osegueda, M. ( 2004, October 28). Rap the vote: Hip-hop celebs are out to inspire fans to vote. Fresno Bee. Retrieved from LexisNexis database.
24.
Patterson, T. ( 1993). Out of order. New York, NY: Knopf.
25.
Perse, E.M. ( 1994). Political media gratifications scale. In R. B. Rubin, P. Palmgreen , & H. E. Sypher (Eds.), Communication research measures: A sourcebook (pp. 296-300). New York: Guilford.
26.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2008 ). The Internet gains in politics. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/pdfs/Pew_MediaSources_jan08.pdf
27.
Pinkleton, B.E., Austin, E.W., & Fortman, K.K. ( 1998). Relationships of media use and political disaffection to political efficacy and voting behavior. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 42, 34-49.
28.
Pinkleton, B.E., Um, N.H., & Austin, E.W. ( 2002). An exploration of the effects of negative advertising on political decision making. Journal of Advertising, 31(1), 13-25.
29.
Putnam, R.D. ( 1995). Turning in, turning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science and Politics , 28, 664-683.
30.
Rahn, W., & Transue, J. ( 1998). Social trust and value change: The decline of social capital in American youth, 1976-1995. Political Psychology , 19, 545-565.
31.
Rahn, W.M., & Hirshorn, R.M. (1999). Political advertising and public mood: A study of children’s political orientations. Political Communication, 16, 387-407.
32.
Robinson, M.J. ( 1976). Public affairs television and the growth of political malaise. American Political Science Review, 70, 409-432.
33.
Rosenstone, S.J., Kinder, D.R., Miller, W.E., & the National Election Studies. ( 1997). National election studies, 1996: Pre-and-post election study. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Center for Political Studies.
34.
Rubin, R.B., Palmgreen, P., & Sypher, H.E. ( 1994). Communication research measures: A sourcebook. New York: Guilford Press.
35.
Sanders, K.R., & Kaid, L.L. ( 1978). An overview of political communication theory and research: 1976-77. In B. Ruben (Ed.), Communication Yearbook II, (pp. 375-389). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
36.
Tinkham, S.F., Weaver Lariscy, R.A. , Sung, Y., & Hall, A.L. (2002, May). Should negative political advertising be regulated? Empirical implications for "stand by your ad" legislation. Paper presented to the AMA Marketing and Public Policy Conference, Atlanta, GA.
37.
Trammell, K.D., & Keshelashvili, A. (2005). Examining the new influencers: A self-presentation study of A-list blogs. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 968-982.
38.
Weaver Lariscy, R.A., & Tinkham, S.F. ( 1999a). The sleeper effect and negative political advertising . Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 13-30.
39.
Weaver Lariscy, R.A., & Tinkham, S.F. ( 1999b, May). Watching the adwatch: Does it make a difference? Should it?Paper presented to the Political Communication Division, International Communication Association, San Francisco, CA.
40.
Wells, S. ( 2003). Engaging the largest U.S. political party: A study of nonvoters in campaign 2000. Paper presented to the Political Communication Division, National Communication Association Annual Conference, Miami, FL.
