This study examines interpersonal political discussion in the context of a democratizing society, focusing specifically on its impact on political knowledge and awareness of the danger of majority tyranny. Moreover, following the argument that the normatively desirable impact of political discussion is likely to emerge or be stronger under specific conditions, this study treats disagreement and support for democratization as two moderators of discussion effects. Analysis of a representative survey (n = 800) conducted in Hong Kong shows that frequency of interpersonal political discussion relates positively to political knowledge. The relationship is stronger among people who experience more disagreement in discussion. Support for democracy does not moderate the impact of discussion on knowledge. But a three-way interaction effect is found on awareness of the danger of majority tyranny: Discussion leads to such awareness only among supporters of democracy who experience disagreement in discussion. This study thus both replicates and extends the findings in the existing, mostly U.S.based literature on the impact of political talk.
Almond, G., & Verba, S. (1963). The civic culture. Boston: Little, Brown.
3.
Beck, P.A. (1991). Voters' intermediation environments in the 1988 presidential contest. Public Opinion Quarterly, 55, 371-394.
4.
Bohman, J. (1996). Public deliberation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
Chambers, S. (1996). Reasonable democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
6.
David, C., Cappella, J.N., & Fishbein, M. (2006). The social diffusion of influence among adolescents: Group interaction in a chat room environment about antidrug advertisements . Communication Theory, 16(1), 118-140.
7.
Delli Carpini, M.X., Cook, F.L., & Jacobs, L.R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315-344.
8.
Dryzek, J. (2000). Deliberative democracy and beyond. New York: Oxford University Press.
9.
Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics. New York : Cambridge University Press.
10.
Eveland, W.P. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177-193.
11.
Eveland, W.P., & Thomson, T. (2006). Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge. Journal of Communication, 56(3), 523-542.
12.
Fishkin, J. (1991). Democracy and deliberation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13.
Fishkin, J. (1995). The voice of the people. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
14.
Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond left and right. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
15.
Guttman, A., & Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
Hardy, B.W., & Scheufele, D.A. (2005). Examining differential gains from internet use: Comparing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 71-84.
18.
Holbert, R.L., Benoit, W.L., Hansen, G.J., & Wen, W.C. (2002). The role of communication in the formation of an issue-based citizenry. Communication Monographs, 69(4), 296-310.
19.
Huckfeldt, R. (2001). The social communication of political expertise . American Journal of Political Science, 45, 425-438.
20.
Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P.E., & Sprague, J. (2004). Political disagreement. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Ikeda, K., & Huckfeldt, R. (2001). Political communication and disagreement among citizens in Japan and the United States. Political Behavior , 23(1), 23-51.
23.
Katz, E., & Lazarsfeld, P. (1955). Personal Influence. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
24.
Kim, J., Wyatt, R.O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication , 16, 361-385.
25.
Kwak, N., Williams, A.E., Wang, X.R., & Lee, H. (2005). Talking politics and engaging politics: An examination of the interactive relationships between structural features of political talk and discussion engagement. Communication Research, 32(1), 87-111.
26.
Lee, F.L.F. (2005). Ordinary political conversation and public opinion expression: Is existence of discord necessary? Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82(4), 891-909.
27.
Lee, F.L.F. (2006). Collective efficacy, support for democracy, and political participation in Hong Kong. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18(3), 297-317.
28.
Lee, F.L.F. (2007). Talk radio listening, opinion expression and political discussion in a democratizing society. Asian Journal of Communication , 17(1), 78-96.
29.
Lee, F.L.F., & Chan, J.M. (2005). Political attitudes, participation, and Hong Kong identities after 1997. Issues & Studies, 41(2), 1-35.
30.
Lee, F.L.F., & Lin, A.M.Y. (2006). Newspaper editorial discourse and the politics of self-censorship in Hong Kong. Discourse & Society, 17(2), 331-358.
31.
Lo, S.H. (1999). Citizen participation, political culture and governability in Hong Kong: A critique of the psychocultural approach. In J. Y. S. Cheng (Ed.), Political participation in Hong Kong (pp. 49-69). Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press.
32.
Mansbridge, J. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In S. Macedo (Ed.), Deliberative politics (pp. 211-240). New York: Oxford University Press.
33.
McClurg, S.D. (2006a). Political disagreement in context: The conditional effect of neighborhood context, disagreement and political talk on electoral participation. Political Behavior, 28(4), 349-366.
34.
McClurg, S.D. (2006b). The electoral relevance of political talk: Examining disagreement and expertise effects in social networks on political participation . American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 737-754.
35.
McIntosh, M.E., Mac Iver, M.A., Abele, D.G., & Nolle, D.B. (1995). Minority rights and majority rule: Ethnic tolerance in Romania and Bulgaria. Social Forces, 73(3), 939-967.
36.
McLeod, J.M., Scheufele, D.A., & Moy, P. (1999). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation . Political Communication, 16(3), 315-336.
37.
Moy, P., & Gastil, J. (2006). Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions. Political Communication, 23(4), 443-460.
38.
Mutz, D.C. (2002a). Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 111-126.
39.
Mutz, D.C. (2002b). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science , 46(4), 838-855.
40.
Mutz, D.C. (2006). Hearing the other side. New York: Cambridge University Press.
41.
Myers, R.K. (1994). Interpersonal and mass media communication: Political learning in New Hampshire's 1st in the nation presidential primary. Sociological Spectrum, 14(2), 143-165.
42.
Nir, L. (2005). Ambivalent social networks and their consequences for participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17(4), 422-442.
43.
Price, V., Cappella, J.N., & Nir, L. (2002). Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political Communication, 19(1), 95-112.
44.
Priester, J.R., & Petty, R.E. (2001). Extending the bases of subjective attitudinal ambivalence: Interpersonal and intrapersonal antecedents of evaluative tension . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80(1), 19-34.
45.
Ryfe, D.M. (2005). Does deliberative democracy work?Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 49-71.
46.
Scheufele, D.A. (2000). Talk or conversation? Dimensions of interpersonal discussion and their implications for participatory democracy. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(4), 727-743.
47.
Scheufele, D.A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29(1), 46-65.
48.
Scheufele, D.A., Hardy, B.W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I.S., & Nisbet, E. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 728-753.
49.
Scheufele, D.A., Nisbet, M.C., Brossard, D., & Nisbet, E.C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21(3), 315-338.
50.
Schudson, M. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy . Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 297-309.
51.
Sing, M. (2005). Public support for democracy in Hong Kong. Democratization, 12(2), 244-261.
52.
Sotirovic, M., & McLeod, J.M. (2001). Values, communication behavior, and political participation. Political Communication, 18(3), 273-300.
53.
Southwell, B.G., & Torres, A. (2006). Connecting interpersonal and mass communication: Science news exposure, perceived ability to understand science, and conversation . Communication Monographs, 73(3), 334-350.
54.
Southwell, B.G., & Yzer, M.C. (2007). The roles of interpersonal communication in mass media campaigns. Communication Yearbook, 31, 419-462.
55.
Straits, B.C. (1991). Bringing strong ties back in: Interpersonal gateways to political information and influence. Public Opinion Quarterly , 55(3), 432-448.
56.
Tse, P.W. (2005). The impact of 1997 on political apathy in Hong Kong. Political Quarterly, 66, 210-220.
57.
Wyatt, R.O., Katz, E., & Kim, J. (2000). Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in public and private spaces. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 71-92.
58.
Visser, P.S., & Mirabile, R.R. (2004). Attitudes in the social context: The impact of social network composition on individual-level attitude strength. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(6), 779-795.
59.
Young, I.M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. New York: Oxford University Press.
