Prior research has reliably shown a positive relationship between political talk and political knowledge. This study sought to build upon this research by assessing the association between internet-based textual political expression and political knowledge. Notably, while online textual political expression is closely linked to traditional conceptualizations of political talk, it is also different in several key ways. Accordingly, this study drew upon research and theorization in the areas of political talk, online expression, and communication self-effects to explore the association between political commentary frequency on Facebook and performance on a political knowledge quiz. Moreover, we investigated the degree to which expression-apparent elaborative thinking levels were differentially associated with political knowledge. The results indicated that Facebook-based textual political expression was, as predicted, positively associated with political knowledge. Therein, we found that textual political expression indicative of high levels of elaboration was much more strongly associated with political knowledge levels than textual political expression that was indicative of comparatively lower levels of elaboration. Finally, exploratory analyses suggested that highly elaborative textual political expression was at least as strongly related to political knowledge as traditional media consumption variables.
AmsalemE.NirL. (2019). Does interpersonal discussion increase political knowledge? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 48(5), 619–641. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219866357
2.
AndersonK.HopmannD. N. (2018). Compensator, amplifier, or distractor? The moderating role of informal political talk on the effect of news media use on current-affairs learning among first-time voters. Political Communication, 35(4), 634–654. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1478917
3.
AsimovicN.NaglerJ.BonneauR.TuckerJ. (2021). Testing the effects of Facebook usage in an ethnically polarized setting. PNAS, 118(25), e2022819118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2022819118
4.
BarnidgeM. (2017). Exposure to political disagreement in social media versus face-to-face and anonymous online settings. Political Communication, 34(2), 302–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1235639
5.
BeamM. A.HutchensM. J.HmielowskiJ. D. (2016). Clicking vs. Sharing: The relationship between online news behaviors and political knowledge. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 215–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.013
6.
BodeL. (2017). Gateway political behaviors: The frequency and consequences of low-cost political engagement on social media. Social Media + Society, 3(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117743349
7.
BourdreauC.LupiaA. (2011). Political knowledge. In DruckmanJ. N.GreenD. P.KuklinskiJ. H.LupiaA. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of experimental political science (pp. 310–336). Cambridge University Press.
8.
CacciatoreM.YeoS. K.ScheufeleD. A.XenosM. A.BrossardD.CorelyE. A. (2018). Is Facebook making us dumber? Exploring social media use as a predictor of political knowledge. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(2), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018770447
9.
ChadwickA. (2009). Web 2.0: New challenges for the study of e-democracy in an era of informational exuberance. I/S: Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society, 5(1), 9–41. https://kb.osu.edu/handle/1811/72922
10.
ChaikenS. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(5), 752–766. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.752
11.
ChoJ.AhmedS.KeumH.ChoiY. J.LeeJ. H. (2018). Influencing myself: Self-reinforcement through online political expression. Communication Research, 45(1), 83–111. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216644020
12.
CoeK.KenskiK.RainsS. A. (2014). Online and uncivil? Patterns and determinants of incivility in newspaper website comments. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 658–679. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12104
13.
ConoverP. J.MillerP. R. (2018). Taking everyday political talk seriously. In BächtigerA.DryzekJ. S.MansbridgeJ.WarrenM. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy (pp. 378–391). Oxford University Press.
ConroyM.FeezellJ. T.GuerreroM. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535–1546. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.03.012
16.
CopiI.CohenC. (2005). Introduction to logic (12th ed.). Routledge.
17.
Delli CarpiniM. X.KeeterS. (1993). Measuring political knowledge: Putting first things first. American Journal of Political Science, 37(4), 1179–1206. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111549
18.
Delli CarpiniM. X.KeeterS. (1996). What Americans know about politics and why it matters. Yale University Press.
19.
de VreeseC. H.BoomgaardenH. (2006). News, political knowledge and participation: The differential effects of news media exposure on political knowledge and participation. Acta Politica, 41(4), 317–341. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500164
20.
DimitrovaD. V.ShehataA.StrömbäckJ.NordL. W. (2014). The effects of digital media on political knowledge and participation in election campaigns: Evidence from panel data. Communication Research, 41(1), 95–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211426004
21.
EvelandW. P.Jr. (2001). The cognitive mediation model of learning from the news: Evidence from nonelection, off-year election, and presidential election contexts. Communication Research, 28(5), 571–601. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365001028005001
22.
EvelandW. P.Jr. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490443877
23.
EvelandW. P.Jr.HayesA. F.ShahD. V.KwakN. (2005). Understanding the relationship between communication and political knowledge: A model comparison approach using panel data. Political Communication, 22(4), 423–446. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600500311345
24.
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(2), 205–224. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x
25.
EvelandW. P.Jr.MoreyA. C.HutchensM. J. (2011). Beyond deliberation: New directions for the study of informal political conversation from a communication perspective. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1082–1103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01598.x
26.
EvelandW. P.Jr.SchmittJ. B. (2015). Communication content and knowledge content matters: Integrating manipulation and observation in studying news and discussion learning effects. Journal of Communication, 65(1), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12138
27.
EvelandW. P.Jr.ShahD. V.KwakN. (2003). Assessing causality in the cognitive mediation model: A panel study of motivations, information processing, and learning during campaign 2000. Communication Research, 30(4), 359–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650203253369
28.
EvelandW. P.Jr.ThomsonT. (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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00299.x
29.
FerrucciP.HoppT.VargoC. J. (2020). Civic engagement, social capital, and ideological extremity: Exploring online political engagement and political expression on Facebook. New Media & Society, 22(6), 1095–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819873110
Gil De ZúñigaH.MolyneuxL.ZhengP. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 612–634. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12103
HalpernD.GibbsJ. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008
36.
HarelT. O.JamesonJ. K.MoazI. (2020). The normalization of hatred: Identity, affective polarization, and dehumanization on Facebook in the context of intractable political conflict. Social Media + Society, 6(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120913983
37.
HendrickA. M.HadenC. A.OrnsteinP. A. (2009). Elaborative talk during and after an event: Conversational style influences children’s memory reports. Journal of Cognition and Development, 10(3), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248370903155841
38.
HivelyM. H.EvelandW. P.Jr. (2009). Contextual antecedents and political consequences of adolescent political discussion, discussion elaboration, and network diversity. Political Communication, 26(1), 30–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600802622837
39.
HocevarK. P.FlanaginA. J.MetzgerM. J. (2014). Social media self-efficacy and information evaluation online. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 254–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.020
40.
HoffmanL. H. (2012). Participation or communication? An explication of political activity in the Internet age. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(3), 217–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2011.650929
41.
HolbertR. L.BenoitW.HansenG.WenW. C. (2002). The role of communication in the formation of an issue-based citizenry. Communication Monographs, 69(4), 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750216549
42.
HyunK. D.KimJ. (2015). The role of new media in sustaining the status quo: Online political expression, nationalism, and system support in China. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7), 766–781. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.994543
43.
JenningsF. J.BramlettJ. C.McKinneyM. S.HardyM. M. (2020). Tweeting along partisan lines: Identity-motivated elaboration and presidential debates. Social Media + Society, 6(4), https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120965518
44.
JenningsM. K. (1996). Political knowledge over time and across generations. Public Opinion Quarterly, 60(2), 228–252. https://doi.org/10.1086/297749
45.
JungN.KimY.Gil de ZúñigaH. (2011). The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication & Society, 14(4), 407–430. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2010.496135
46.
KimB.BarnidgeM.KimY. (2020). The communicative processes of attempted political persuasion in social media environments: The mediating roles of cognitive elaboration and political orientations. Information Technology & People, 33(2), 813–828. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-03-2018-0157
47.
KimJ.KimE. J. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x
48.
KleinbergS. M.LauR. R. (2019). The importance of political knowledge for effective citizenship: Differences between the broadcast and Internet generations. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(2), 338–362. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz025
49.
KohringM.MatthesJ. (2007). Trust in news media: Development and validation of a multidimensional scale. Communication Research, 34(2), 231–252. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650206298071
50.
KwakN.WilliamsA. E.WangX.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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650204271400
51.
KwanJ. L. Y.ChanW. (2011). Comparing standardized coefficients in structural equation modeling: A model reparameterization approach. Behavior Research Methods, 43(3), 730–745. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0088-6
52.
LaneD. S.LeeS. S.LiangF.KimD. H.ShenL.WeeksB. E.KwakN. (2019). Social media expression and the political self. Journal of Communication, 69(1), 49–72. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy064
53.
LechelerS.de VreeseC. H. (2017). News media, knowledge, and political interest: Evidence of a dual role from a field experiment. Journal of Communication, 67(4), 545–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12314
54.
LillekerD.Koc-MichalskaK.BimberB. (2021). Women learn while men talk?: Revisiting gender differences in political engagement in online environments. Information, Communication, & Society, 24(14), 2037–2053. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2021.1961005
McGuiganF.SalmonK. (2004). The time to talk: The influence of the timing of adult–child talk on children’s event memory. Child Development, 75(3), 669–686. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00700.x
58.
McLeodJ. M.BeckerL. B. (1981). The uses and gratifications approach. In NimmoD. D.SandersK. R. (Eds.), Handbook of political communication (pp. 67–99). SAGE.
59.
MikolovT.GraveE.BojanowskiP.PuhrschC.JoulinA. (2017). Advances in pre-training distributed word representations. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.09405
60.
MinozziW.SongH.LazerD. M.NebloM. A.OgnyanovaK. (2020). The incidental pundit: Who talks politics with whom and why?The American Journal of Political Science, 64(1), 135–151. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12469
61.
PapacharissiZ. (2010). A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites. Routledge.
62.
PettyR. E.CacioppoJ. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. Springer-Verlag.
PingreeR. (2007). How messages affect their senders: A more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory, 17(4), 439–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00306.x
68.
ReichertF. (2016). How internal political efficacy translates political knowledge into political participation: Evidence from Germany. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 12(2), 221–241. https://doi.org/10.5964/ejop.v12i2.1095
69.
ShahD. V. (2016). Conversation is the soul of democracy: Expression effects, communication mediation, and digital media. Communication and the Public, 1(1), 12–18. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047316628310
70.
ShahD. V.McLeodD. M.KimE.LeeS. Y.GotliebM. R.HoS. H.BreivikH. (2007). Political consumerism: How communication and consumption orientations drive “lifestyle politics.”The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 611(1), 217–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716206298714
71.
ShahD. V.McLeodD. M.RojasH.ChoJ.WagnerM. W.FriedlandL. A. (2017). Revising the communication mediation model for a new political communication ecology. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 491–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12115
72.
ShahinS.SaldañaM.Gil de ZunigaH. (2021). Peripheral elaboration model: The impact of incidental news exposure on political participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 18(2), 148–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2020.1832012
73.
SlaterM. D. (2007). Reinforcing spirals: The mutual influence of media selectivity and media effects and their impact on individual behavior and social identity. Communication Theory, 17(3), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00296.x
74.
Stromer-GalleyJ. (2002). New voices in the public sphere: A comparative analysis of interpersonal and online political talk. Javnost-The Public, 9(2), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2002.11008798
75.
VaccariC.ValerianiA.BarberáP.BonneauR.JostJ. T.NaglerJ.TuckerJ. A. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower- and higher-threshold political activities among Twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 221–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12108
76.
ValkenburgP. (2017). Understanding self-effects in social media. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 477–490. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12113
77.
VaidhyanathanS. (2018). Antisocial media: How Facebook disconnects us and undermines democracy. Oxford Press.
78.
VerbaS.SchlozmanK. L.BradyH. E. (1995).Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.
79.
WeeksB. E.LaneD. D.KimD. H.LeeS. S.KwakN. (2017). Incidental exposure, selective exposure, and political information sharing: Integrating online exposure patterns and expression on social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(6), 363–379. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12199
80.
Whitten-WoodringJ.KleinbergM. S.ThawnghmungA.ThitsarM. T. (2020). Poison if you don’t know how to use it: Facebook, democracy, and human rights in Myanmar. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(3), 407–425. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220919666
81.
YamamotoM.KushinM. J.DalisayF. (2014). Social media and mobiles as political mobilization forces for young adults: Examining the moderating role of online political expression in political participation. New Media & Society, 17(6), 880–898. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813518390
82.
YamamotoM.KushinM. J.DalisayF. (2018). How informed are messaging app users about politics? A linkage of messaging app use and political knowledge and participation. Telematics & Informatics, 35(8), 2376–2386. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.008
83.
YarchiM.BadenC.Kligler-VilenchikN. (2021). Political polarization on the digital sphere: A cross-platform, over-time analysis of interactional, positional, and affective polarization on social media. Political Communication, 38(1–2), 98–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1785067
84.
YooW.ChoiD-H.ParkK. (2016). The effects of SNS communication: How expressing and receiving information predict MERS-preventive behavioral intentions in South Korea. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 34–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.058
85.
YooS. W.KimJ. W.Gil de ZúñigaH. (2017). Cognitive benefits for senders: Antecedents and effects of political expression social media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(1), 17–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016654438
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
