Past studies have found contradicting evidence regarding the influence of political discussion with disagreeing others on political participation. This study argues that the impact of discussion with disagreement is likely to depend on the type of participatory activities involved. It conceptualizes a distinction between position-taking and nonposition-taking activities. The former refers to activities designed to have potential participants taking up a set position on a specific matter, whereas the latter refers to activities not designed as such. It is argued that discussion with disagreeing others is likely to suppress participation in position-taking activities, since such activities leave lesser room for participants to express the complexities of and possible ambivalence in their views. In contrast, discussion with disagreeing others may encourage participation in nonposition-taking activities. Relevant hypotheses are tested with a survey conducted in Hong Kong examining the impact of discussion and disagreement on voting, protest participation, and calling into talk radio.
BelangerP.EaglesM. (2007). Partisan cross-pressure and voter turnout: The influence of micro- and macro-environments. Social Science Quarterly, 88, 850-867.
2.
BennettS. E.FlickingerR. S.RhineS. L. (2000). Political talk over here, over there, over time. British Journal of Political Science, 30(1), 99-119.
3.
ChambersS. (1996). Reasonable democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
4.
CushionS.FranklinB.CourtG. (2006). Citizens, readers and local newspaper coverage of the 2005 UK general election. Javnost: The Public, 13(1), 41-60.
Delli CarpiniM. X.CookF. L.JacobsL. R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7, 315-344.
7.
EvelandW. P. (1997). Interactions and nonlinearity in mass communication: Connecting theory and methodology. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 400-416.
8.
EvelandW. P. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21, 177-193.
9.
EvelandW. P.Jr.HivelyM. H. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication, 59, 205-224.
10.
EvelandW. P.ThomsonT. (2006). Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge. Journal of Communication, 56, 523-542.
11.
FeldmanL.PriceV. (2008). Confusion or enlightenment? How exposure to disagreement moderates the effects of political discussion and media use on candidate knowledge. Communication Research, 35(1), 61-87.
12.
FishkinJ. (1995). The voice of the people. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
13.
GuttmanA.ThompsonD. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
14.
HabermasJ. (1996). Between facts and norms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15.
HardyB. W.ScheufeleD. A. (2009). Presidential campaign dynamics and the ebb and flow of talk as a moderator: Media exposure, knowledge, and political discussion. Communication Theory, 19(1), 89-110.
16.
HayesA.GlynnC.HugeM. (2008). Cautions in the interpretation of coefficients and hypothesis tests from linear models with interactions. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada, QC.
17.
HeaneyM. T.RojasF. (2007). Partisans, nonpartisans, and the anti-war movement in the United States. American Politics Research, 35, 431-464.
18.
HuckfeldtR.JohnsonP. E.SpragueJ. (2004). Political disagreement. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
HuckfeldtR.MendezJ. M.OsbornT. (2004). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25(1), 65-95.
20.
KimJ.WyattR. O.KatzE. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication, 16, 361-385.
21.
KwakN.WilliamsA. E.WangX. R.LeeH. (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.
22.
LamW. M. (2004). Understanding the political culture of Hong Kong. New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
23.
LeeF. L. F. (2005). Ordinary political conversation and public opinion expression: Is existence of discord necessary?Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82, 891-909.
24.
LeeF. L. F. (2006). Collective efficacy, support for democracy, and political participation in Hong Kong. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 297-317.
25.
LeeF. L. F. (2007). Talk radio listening, opinion expression and political discussion in a democratizing society. Asian Journal of Communication, 17(1), 78-96.
26.
LeeF. L. F. (2009). The impact of political discussion in a democratizing society: The moderating role of disagreement and support for democracy. Communication Research, 36, 379-399.
27.
LeighleyJ. E. (1990). Social interaction and contextual influences on political participation. American Politics Quarterly, 18, 459-475.
28.
LeurdijkA. (1997). Common sense versus political discourse: Debating racism and multicultural society in Dutch talk shows. European Journal of Communication, 12, 147-168.
29.
LuiT. L.ChuiS. W. K. (Eds). (2000). The dynamics of social movements in Hong Kong. Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China: Hong Kong University Press.
30.
MaE.ChanJ. M. (2006). Global connectivity and local politics: SARS, talk radio, and public opinion. In DavisD.SiuH. (Eds), SARS: Reception and interpretation in three Chinese cities (pp. 19-46). London, UK: Routledge.
31.
MansbridgeJ. (1999). Everyday talk in the deliberative system. In MacedoS. (Ed.), Deliberative politics (pp. 211-240). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
32.
McClurgS. D. (2003). Social networks and political participation: The role of social interaction in explaining political participation. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 449-464.
33.
McClurgS. D. (2006a). Political disagreement in context: The conditional effect of neighborhood context, disagreement and political talk on electoral participation. Political Behavior, 28, 349-366.
34.
McClurgS. 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, 737-754.
35.
McGrawK. M.BartelsB. (2005). Ambivalence toward American political institutions: Sources and consequences. In CraigS. C.MartinezM. D. (Eds.), Ambivalence and the structure of political opinion (pp. 105-126). New York, NY: McMillan.
36.
MeffertM. F.GugeM.LodgeM. (2004). Good, bad, and ambivalent: The consequences of multidimensional political attitudes. In SarisW. E.SnidermanP. M. (Eds.), Studies in public opinion (pp. 63-92). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
37.
MouffeC. (2000). The democratic paradox. New York, NY: Verso.
38.
MutzD. C. (2002a). Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 111-126.
39.
MutzD. C. (2002b). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46, 838-855.
40.
MutzD. C. (2006). Hearing the other side. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
41.
MutzD. C. (2008). Is deliberative democracy a falsifiable theory?Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 521-538.
42.
NirL. (2005). Ambivalent social networks and their consequences for participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17, 422-442.
43.
Noelle-NeumannE. (1983). Spiral of silence. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
44.
PanZ. D.ShenL. J.PaekH. J.SunY. (2006). Mobilizing political talk in a presidential campaign: An examination of campaign effects in a deliberative framework. Communication Research, 33, 315-345.
45.
ParsonsB. M. (2010). Social networks and the affective impact of political disagreement. Political Behavior, 32, 181-204.
46.
PattieC. J.JohnstonR. J. (2008). It’s good to talk: Talk, disagreement and tolerance. British Journal of Political Science, 38, 677-698.
47.
PattieC. J.JohnstonR. J. (2009). Conversation, disagreement and political participation. Political Behavior, 31, 261-285.
48.
ScheufeleD. A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29(1), 46-65.
49.
ScheufeleD. A.EvelandW. P. (2001). Perceptions of “public opinion” and “public” opinion expression. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 13(1), 25-44.
50.
ScheufeleD. A.HardyB. W.BrossardD.Waismel-ManorI. S.NisbetE. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56, 728-753.
51.
ScheufeleD. A.MoyP. (2000). Twenty-five years of the spiral of silence: A conceptual review and an empirical outlook. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 12(1), 3-28.
52.
ScheufeleD. A.NisbetM. C.BrossardD.NisbetE. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21, 315-338.
53.
SchudsonM. (1997). Why conversation is not the soul of democracy. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 14, 297-309.
54.
SearingD. D.SoltF.ConoverP. J.CreweI. (2007). Public discussion in the deliberative system: Does it make better citizens?British Journal of Political Science, 37, 587-618.
55.
ThompsonD. (2008). Deliberative democratic theory and empirical political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 11, 497-520.
56.
VerbaS.NieN. (1972). Participation in America. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
57.
WojcieszakM.BaekY. M.Delli CarpiniM. X. (2010). Deliberative and participatory democracy? Ideological strength and the process leading from deliberation to political engagement. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 22, 154-180.
58.
WyattR. O.KatzE.KimJ. (2000). Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in public and private spaces. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 71-92.
59.
YoungI. M. (2000). Inclusion and democracy. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
