The literature on the relationship between social media and online political participation continues to expand. Yet, attention to the effect of cognitive dispositions central to user engagement on social media is rare. This study advances the current theoretical understanding of the effects of social media news use by focusing on online privacy concerns. Two studies in Singapore (Study 1 using cross-sectional survey data) and the United States (Study 2 using two-wave panel data) find that social media news use is positively associated with online political participation. Still, public concern regarding online privacy is negatively related to online political participation. Moreover, moderation analyses suggest that those with more significant privacy concerns are least likely to engage in online political participation, even at higher social media news use levels. We also identify that those with lower cognitive ability are more likely to curb online participation due to privacy concerns.
AhmedS (2021) Navigating the maze: deepfakes, cognitive ability, and social media news skepticism. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 4 June. DOI: 10.1177/14614448211019198.
2.
AhmedSChoJ (2019) The roles of different news media use and press freedom in education generated participation inequality: an eight country comparative analysis. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media63(3): 566–586.
3.
AhmedSMadrid-MoralesD (2021) Is it still a man’s world? Social media news use and gender inequality in online political engagement. Information, Communication & Society24(3): 381–399.
4.
AndrejevicM (2014) The big data divide. International Journal of Communication8(1): 1673–1689.
5.
AviramAEshet-AlkalaiY (2006) Towards a theory of digital literacy: three scenarios for the next steps. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning9: 5944.
6.
BennettWLSegerbergA (2012) The logic of connective action: digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society15(5): 739–768.
7.
BestSJKruegerBS (2011) Government monitoring and political participation in the United States: the distinct roles of anger and anxiety. American Politics Research39(1): 85–117.
8.
BimberB (2001) Information and political engagement in America: the search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly54(1): 53–67.
9.
BodeL (2016) Political news in the news feed: learning politics from social media. Mass Communication and Society19(1): 24–48.
10.
BoermanSCKruikemeierSBorgesiusFJ (2021) Exploring motivations for online privacy protection behavior: insights from panel data. Communication Research48(7): 953–977.
11.
BontchevaKGorrellGWesselsB (2013) Social media and information overload: survey results. arXiv, https://arxiv.org/abs/1306.0813
12.
BoulianneS (2015) Social media use and participation: a meta-analysis of current research. Information, Communication & Society18(5): 524–538.
13.
BoulianneS (2016) Online news, civic awareness, and engagement in civic and political life. new media & society18(9): 1840–1856.
14.
BybeeCRMcLeodJMLeutscherWD, et al. (1981) Mass communication and voter volatility. Public Opinion Quarterly45(1): 69–90.
ChoHLeeJSChungS (2010) Optimistic bias about online privacy risks: testing the moderating effects of perceived controllability and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior26(5): 987–995.
17.
ChoJShahDVMcLeodJM, et al. (2009) Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: advancing an OSROR model of communication effects. Communication Theory19(1): 66–88.
18.
CitrinJStokerL (2018) Political trust in a cynical age. Annual Review of Political Science21: 49–70.
19.
DawesCCesariniDFowlerJH, et al. (2014) The relationship between genes, psychological traits, and political participation. American Journal of Political Science58(4): 888–903.
20.
DearyIJBattyGDGaleCR (2008a) Bright children become enlightened adults. Psychological Science19(1): 1–6.
21.
DearyIJBattyGDGaleCR (2008b) Childhood intelligence predicts voter turnout, voting preferences, and political involvement in adulthood: the 1970 British cohort study. Intelligence36(6): 548–555.
22.
DennyKDoyleO (2008) Political interest, cognitive ability and personality: determinants of voter turnout in Britain. British Journal of Political Science38(2): 291–310.
23.
DhirMMidhaV (2014) Overload, privacy settings, and discontinuation: a preliminary study of Facebook users. In: CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, Toronto, ON, Canada, 26 April–1 May 2014. New York: ACM.
24.
DuboisEBlankG (2018) The echo chamber is overstated: the moderating effect of political interest and diverse media. Information, Communication & Society21(5): 729–745.
25.
EdgerlySVragaEKBodeL, et al. (2018) New media, new relationship to participation? A closer look at youth news repertoires and political participation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly95(1): 192–212.
26.
EkströmMShehataA (2018) Social media, porous boundaries, and the development of online political engagement among young citizens. new media & society20(2): 740–759.
27.
EllisonNBVitakJSteinfieldC, et al. (2011) Negotiating privacy concerns and social capital needs in a social media environment. In: TrepteSReineckeL (eds) Privacy Online. Berlin: Springer, pp. 19–32.
28.
Gil de ZúñigaHJungNValenzuelaS (2012) Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-mediated Communication17(3): 319–336.
29.
Gil de ZúñigaHMolyneuxLZhengP (2014) Social media, political expression, and political participation: panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication64(4): 612–634.
30.
GottfredsonLS (1997) Mainstream science on intelligence: an editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography. Intelligence24(1): 13–23.
31.
GreenwaldG (2014) No Place to Hide: Edward Snowden, the NSA, and the US Surveillance State. New York: Metropolitan Book.
32.
HayesAF (2017) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. New York: Guilford publications.
33.
HoffmannCPLutzC (2021) Digital divides in political participation: the mediating role of social media self-efficacy and privacy concerns. Policy & Internet13(1): 6–29.
34.
HoffmannCPLutzCRanziniG (2016) Privacy cynicism: a new approach to the privacy paradox. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace10(4): article 7.
35.
HongYLinTT (2017) The Impacts of political socialization on people’s online and offline political participation—taking the youth of Singapore as an example. Advances in Journalism and Communication5(1): 50–70.
36.
HuangMHHauserRM (1998) Trends in Black–White test score differentials: II. The WORDSUM vocabulary test. In: NeisserU (ed.) The Rising Curve: Long-term Gains in IQ and Related Measures. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, pp. 303–332.
37.
JensenA (1998) The G Factor. Westport, CT: Praeger.
38.
JeongYCoyleE (2014) What are you worrying about on Facebook and Twitter? An empirical investigation of young social network site users’ privacy perceptions and behaviors. Journal of Interactive Advertising14(2): 51–59.
KimYRussoSAmnåE (2017) The longitudinal relation between online and offline political participation among youth at two different developmental stages. new media & society19(6): 899–917.
41.
KlandermansB (1984) Mobilization and participation: social-psychological expansions of resource mobilization theory. American Sociological Review49(5): 583–600.
42.
KoyuncuCLienD (2003) E-commerce and consumer’s purchasing behaviour. Applied Economics35(6): 721–726.
43.
LeeS (2018) The role of social media in protest participation: the case of candlelight vigils in South Korea. International Journal of Communication12: 1523–1540.
44.
LutzCHoffmannCP (2021) Inequalities in online political participation: the role of privacy concerns. In: HargittaiE (ed.) Handbook of Digital Inequality. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 326–340.
45.
McLeodJMKosickiGMMcLeodDM (1994) The expanding boundaries of political communication effects. In: BryantJZillmannD (eds.) Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 123–162.
46.
McLeodJMScheufeleDAMoyP (1999) Community, communication, and participation: the role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation. Political Communication16(3): 315–336.
47.
MarwickAboydd (2018) Understanding privacy at the margins. International Journal of Communication12: 1157–1165.
48.
MillerAH (1974) Political issues and trust in government: 1964–1970. American Political Science Review68(3): 951–972.
49.
MillerAHWattenbergMP (1984) Politics from the pulpit: religiosity and the 1980 elections. Public Opinion Quarterly48(1B): 301–317.
50.
NorbergPAHorneDRHorneDA (2007) The privacy paradox: personal information disclosure intentions versus behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs41(1): 100–126.
51.
NorrisP (1996) Does television erode social capital? A reply to Putnam. Political Science & Politics29(3): 474–480.
52.
OskarssonSCesariniDDawesCT, et al. (2015) Linking genes and political orientations: testing the cognitive ability as mediator hypothesis. Political Psychology36(6): 649–665.
PolatRK (2005) The Internet and political participation: exploring the explanatory links. European Journal of Communication20(4): 435–459.
55.
RodanG (1998) The Internet and political control in Singapore. Political Science Quarterly113(1): 63–89.
56.
RodriguezMGGummadiKSchoelkopfB (2014) Quantifying information overload in social media and its impact on social contagions. In: Eighth international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media, Ann Arbor, MI, 1–4 June.
57.
SaribaySAYilmazO (2017) Analytic cognitive style and cognitive ability differentially predict religiosity and social conservatism. Personality and Individual Differences114: 24–29.
58.
ScheufeleDANisbetMCBrossardD (2003) Pathways to political participation? Religion, communication contexts, and mass media. International Journal of Public Opinion Research15(3): 300–324.
59.
ScottJ (2017) Social media and government surveillance: the case for better privacy protections for our newest public space. Journal of Business & Technology Law12(2): 151–164.
60.
ShahDVChoJEvelandWPJr, et al. (2005) Information and expression in a digital age: modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research32(5): 531–565.
61.
ShahDVChoJNahS, et al. (2007) Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: extending the communication mediation model. Journal of Communication57(4): 676–703.
62.
SingerEVan HoewykJNeugebauerRJ (2003) Attitudes and behavior: the impact of privacy and confidentiality concerns on participation in the 2000 census. Public Opinion Quarterly67(3): 368–384.
63.
SkoricMMZhuQ (2016) Social media and offline political participation: uncovering the paths from digital to physical. International Journal of Public Opinion Research28(3): 415–427.
64.
SnowDAZurcherLAJrEkland-OlsonS (1980) Social networks and social movements: a microstructural approach to differential recruitment. American Sociological Review45(5): 787–801.
65.
StåhlTVan ProoijenJW (2018) Epistemic rationality: skepticism toward unfounded beliefs requires sufficient cognitive ability and motivation to be rational. Personality and Individual Differences122: 155–163.
66.
StoycheffE (2016) Under surveillance: examining Facebook’s spiral of silence effects in the wake of NSA internet monitoring. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly93(2): 296–311.
67.
StoycheffELiuJXuK, et al. (2019) Privacy and the panopticon: online mass surveillance’s deterrence and chilling effects. new media & society21(3): 602–619.
TaylorJFFergusonJEllenPS (2015) From trait to state: understanding privacy concerns. Journal of Consumer Marketing32(2): 99–112.
70.
ThorsonKWellsC (2016) Curated flows: a framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age. Communication Theory26(3): 309–328.
71.
TrepteSTeutschDMasurPK, et al. (2015) Do people know about privacy and data protection strategies? Towards the “Online Privacy Literacy Scale” (OPLIS). In: GutwirthSLeenesRde HertP (eds) Reforming European Data Protection Law. New York: Springer, pp. 333–365.
UtzSKrämerN (2009) The privacy paradox on social network sites revisited: the role of individual characteristics and group norms. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace3(2): 2.
74.
ValenzuelaSKimYGil de ZúñigaH (2012) Social networks that matter: exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research24(2): 163–184.
75.
Van StekelenburgJKlandermansB (2013) The social psychology of protest. Current Sociology61(5–6): 886–905.
76.
WuKWHuangSYYenDC, et al. (2012) The effect of online privacy policy on consumer privacy concern and trust. Computers in Human Behavior28(3): 889–897.
77.
YounS (2009) Determinants of online privacy concern and its influence on privacy protection behaviors among young adolescents. Journal of Consumer Affairs43(3): 389–418.
78.
ZhouTLiH (2014) Understanding mobile SNS continuance usage in China from the perspectives of social influence and privacy concern. Computers in Human Behavior37: 283–289.
79.
ZhuJWeissL (2005) The Wechsler scales. In: FlanaganDHarrisonP (eds.) Contemporary Intellectual Assessment: Theories, Tests, and Issues. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 294−324.
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.
