One thriving area of research on participatory media revolves around political expression and the creation of political content. This study analyzes the connections between these behaviors, heterogeneous information networks, and ideological extremity while accounting for the role of emotional intelligence. Results from a two-wave-panel survey of US adults show that people who engage in content-expressive behavior are embedded in heterogeneous information networks and that emotional intelligence moderates the relationship between content-expressive behavior and ideological extremity.
AustinEJSaklofskeDHHuangSHSet al. (2004) Measurement of trait emotional intelligence: testing and cross-validating a modified version of Schutte et al.’s (1998) measure. Personality and Individual Differences36: 555–562.
4.
BakshyERosennIMarlowCet al. (2012) The role of social networks in information diffusion. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, Lyon, 16–20 April, pp. 519–528. New York: ACM.
5.
BarberáP (2014) How social media reduces mass political polarization: evidence from Germany, Spain, and the United States. Working paper. Available at: pablobarbera.com
6.
BarnidgeM (2015) The role of news in promoting political disagreement on social media. Computers in Human Behavior52: 211–218.
7.
BarnidgeMRojasH (2014) Hostile media perceptions, presumed media influence, and political talk: expanding the corrective action hypothesis. International Journal of Public Opinion Research26(2): 135–156.
8.
Bar-OnR (1997) The Emotional Quotient Inventory (EQ-i): A Test of Emotional Intelligence. Toronto, ON, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.
9.
BenklerY (2006) The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
10.
BlankG (2013) Who creates content?Information, Communication & Society16: 590–612.
11.
BosnjakMDasMLynnP (2015) Methods for probability-based online and mixed-mode panels. Social Science Computer Review34(1): 3–7.
12.
boydDMEllisonNB (2007) Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1): 210–230.
13.
CarrDJBarnidgeMLeeBGet al. (2014) Cynics and skeptics: evaluating the credibility of mainstream and citizen journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly91(3): 452–470.
14.
ChoJShahDVMcLeodJMet al. (2009) Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: advancing an O-S-R-O-R model of communication effects. Communication Theory19(1): 66–68.
15.
CorreaTJeongSH (2011) Race and online content creation: why minorities are actively participating in the Web. Information, Communication & Society14(5): 638–659.
16.
DahlgrenP (2005) The internet, public spheres, and political communication: dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication22(2): 147–162.
17.
Delli CarpiniMXKeeterS (1996) What Americans Know about Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
18.
DiehlTWeeksBGil de ZúñigaH (2016) Political persuasion on social media: tracing direct and indirect effects of news use and social interaction. New Media & Society. 18(9): 1875–1895.
19.
EvelandWPJrHiveyMH (2009) Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication59(2): 205–224.
20.
GarrettRKStroudNJ (2014) Partisan paths to exposure diversity: differences in pro- and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication64(4): 680–701.
21.
GarrettRKDvir GvirsmanSJohnsonBKet al. (2014) Implications of pro- and counterattitudinal information exposure for affective polarization. Human Communication Research40(3): 309–332.
22.
Gil de ZúñigaHJungNValenzuelaS (2012) Social media use for news and individual’s social capital, civic engagement, and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication17(3): 319–336.
23.
Gil de ZúñigaHMolyneuxLZhengP (2014) Social media, political expression, and political participation: an assessment of hot the internet is changing the political environment. New Media & Society11: 553–574.
24.
GildeZúñigaHVeenstraAVragaEet al. (2010) Digital democracy: reimagining pathways to political participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics7(1): 36–51.
25.
GoodeL (2009) Social news, citizen journalism and democracy. New Media & Society11(8): 1287–1305.
26.
GruzdARoyJ (2014) Investigating political polarization on Twitter: a Canadian perspective. Policy & Internet6(1): 28–45.
27.
GuntherACMillerNLiebhartJL (2009) Assimilation and contrast in a test of the hostile media effect. Communication Research36(6): 747–764.
28.
HalpernDGibbsJ (2013) Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of Facebook and YouTube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior29(3): 1159–1168.
29.
HamptonKGouletLSMarlowCet al. (2014a) Why most Facebook users get more than they give. Report for the Pew Research Internet Project. Available at: pewinternet.org
30.
HamptonKRainieLLuWet al. (2014b) Social media and the “spiral of silence.”Report for the Pew Research Internet Project. Available at: pewinternet.org
31.
HannaAWellsCMaurerPet al. (2013) Partisan alignments and political polarization online: a computational approach to understanding the French and U.S. presidential elections. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Politics, Elections, and Data, San Francisco, CA, 27 October–1 November, pp. 15–22. New York: ACM.
32.
HargittaiEWalejkoG (2008) The participation divide: content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Communication & Society11: 239–256.
33.
HighfieldTDuguayS (2014) “Like a monkey with a miniature cymbal”: cultural practices of repetition in visual social media. Paper presented at the annual conference for the Association of Internet Researchers, Phoenix, AZ, 21–24 October.
34.
HimelboimIGleaveESmithM (2009) Discussion catalysts in online political discussions: content importers and conversation starters. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14: 771–789.
35.
HoSSMcLeodDM (2008) Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Communication Research35(2): 190–207.
36.
IyengarSSoodGLelkesY (2012) Affect, not ideology: a social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly76(3): 405–431.
37.
JohnsonD (2007) Mapping the meme: a geographical approach to materialist rhetorical criticism. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies4(1): 27–50.
38.
JohnsonTJKayeBKBichardSLet al. (2007) Every blog has its day: politically-interested internet users’ perceptions of blog credibility. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication13(1): 100–122.
39.
JordanPJTrothAC (2004) Managing emotions during team problem solving: emotional intelligence and conflict resolution. Human Performance17(2): 195–218.
40.
JorfiHBin YaccobHFShahIM (2011) The relationship between demographic variables, emotional intelligence, communication effectiveness, motivation, and job satisfaction. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences1(1): 35–58.
41.
KaufholdK (2010) Citizen journalism and democracy: how user-generated news use relates to political knowledge and participation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly87(3–4): 515–529.
42.
KuntsmanA (2012). Introduction: Affective fabrics of digital cultures. In: KaratzogianniAKuntsmanA (eds) Digital Cultures and the Politics of Emotion: Feelings, Affect, and Technological Change. London: Palgrave McMillan, pp. 1–20.
43.
LivingstoneS (2008) Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society10(3): 393–411.
44.
LutzCWhiteGM (1986) The anthropology of emotions. Annual Review of Anthropology15: 405–436.
45.
MayerJDGeherG (1996) Emotional intelligence and the identification of emotion. Intelligence22(2): 89–113.
46.
NiemiRGCraigSCMatteiF (1991) Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National Election Study. American Political Science Review85(4): 1407–1413.
47.
Noelle-NeumannE (1993) The Spiral of Silence: Public Opinion, Our Social Skin. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
48.
NooneyLPortwood-StacerL (2014) One does not simply: an introduction to the special issue on internet memes. Journal of Visual Culture13(3): 248–252.
49.
PapacharissiZ (2011) A networked self. In: PapacharissiZ (ed.) A Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. New York: Routledge, pp. 304–328.
50.
PapacharissiZ (2012) Affective news and networked publics: the rhythms of news storytelling on #Egypt. Journal of Communication62(2): 266–282.
51.
PapacharissiZ (2014) Affective Publics: Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
52.
Pew Research Center for the People and the Press (2013) July 2013 political survey methodology. Available at: http://www.people-press.org
53.
PingreeRJ (2007) How messages affect their senders: a more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory17(4): 439–461.
54.
PingreeRJ (2015) Effects of online messages on their senders. In: Gil de ZúñigaH (ed.) New Technologies and Civic Engagement: New Agendas in Communication. New York: Routledge, pp. 139.
55.
RobinsonSDeshanoC (2011) Citizen journalists and their third places: what makes people exchange information online (or not)?Journalism Studies12(5): 642–657.
56.
RojasH (2008) Strategy versus understanding: how orientations toward political conversation influence political engagement. Communication Research35(4): 452–480.
57.
RojasH (2015) Egocentric publics and perceptions of the worlds around us. In: Gil de ZúñigaH (ed.) New Technologies and Civic Engagement: New Agendas in Communication. New York: Routledge, pp. 93–102.
58.
RojasHPuig-i-AbrilE (2009) Mobilizers mobilized: information, expression, mobilization and participation in the digital age. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication14(4): 902–927.
59.
RojasHBarnidgeMAbrilEP (2016) Egocentric publics and corrective action. Communication and the Public1(1): 27–38.
60.
SchutteNSMalouffJMHallLEet al. (1998) Development and validation of a measure of emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences25: 167–177.
61.
ShahDV (2016) Conversation is the soul of democracy: expression effects, communication mediation, and digital media. Communication and the Public1(10): 12–18.
62.
SherifMHovlandCI (1961) Social Judgment: Assimilation and Contrast Effects in Communication and Attitude Change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
63.
SunYShenLPanZ (2008) On the behavioral component of the third-person effect. Communication Research35(2): 257–278.
64.
SunsteinCR (2007) Republic.com 2.0: Revenge of the Blogs. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
65.
ThorsonE (2014) Beyond opinion leaders: how attempts to persuade foster political awareness and campaign learning. Communication Research41: 353–374.
66.
TrothACJordanPJLawrenceA (2012) Emotional intelligence, communication competence, and student perceptions of team social cohesion. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment30(4): 414–424.
67.
VaccariCValerianiABarberáPet al. (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 Communication20(2): 221–239.
68.
ValenzuelaS (2013) Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: the roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. American Behavioral Scientist57(7): 920–942.
69.
ValenzuelaSBachmannI (2015) Pride, anger and cross-cutting talk: a three-country study of emotions and disagreement in informal political discussions. International Journal of Public Opinion Research27(4): 544–564.
70.
VerbaSScholzmanKLBradyHE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
71.
VragaEKThorsonKKligler-VilenchikNet al. (2015) How individual sensitivities to disagreement shape youth political expression on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior45: 281–289.
72.
WatsonNWoodenM (2006) Modeling longitudinal survey response: The experience of the HILDA survey. In:Proceedings of the ACSPRI social science methodology conference, Sydney, Australia, 10–13December. Available at: http://old.acspri.org.au/conference2006/proceedings
73.
WeeksBEArdèvol-Abreu A and Gil de Zúñiga H (2015) Online influence? Social media use, opinion leadership, and political persuasion. International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 29(2): 214–239.
74.
ZeidnerMMatthewsGRobertsRD (2012) What We Know about Emotional Intelligence: How It Affects Learning, Work, Relationships, and Our Mental Health. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
