政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/101055
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 113822/144841 (79%)
造訪人次 : 51820908      線上人數 : 550
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧：
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號"，以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋，建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位，可獲得較完整資料
    •  進階搜尋
    政大機構典藏 > 傳播學院 > 新聞學系 > 學位論文 >  Item 140.119/101055


    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/101055


    題名: 社群媒體使用與異質性討論對政治參與的影響
    The impact of social media and heterogeneous talk on political participation
    作者: 林彥伶
    Lin, Yen Ling
    貢獻者: 施琮仁
    Shih, Tsung Jen
    林彥伶
    Lin, Yen Ling
    關鍵詞: Facebook政治使用
    政治參與
    討論網絡異質性
    數位原住民
    數位移民
    digital natives
    digital immigrants
    heterogeneous discussion network
    Facebook use
    political participation
    日期: 2016
    上傳時間: 2016-09-01 23:36:55 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 社群媒體，尤其是Facebook，在台灣的普及程度愈來愈不可忽視，隨著社群媒體逐漸取代傳統媒體，成為個人獲取政治資訊的來源，其驅動政治參與的民主潛能值得進一步探討。

    此外，隨著社群媒體與政治參與的關聯在不同研究中產生分歧，且「討論網絡異質性」與政治參與之間的關聯性受到傳播學界的重視，本研究將Facebook使用區分為積極（表達性）與消極（資訊性）政治使用，並探討此二類使用和異質性討論、Facebook政治參與、線下政治參與的關係（包含直接、間接與交互作用）。此外，本研究將受訪者區分為「數位原住民」及「數位移民」，試圖洞悉此二族群是否在上述變項間存在差異。

    研究結果顯示，唯有積極的Facebook政治使用對本研究中兩種型態的政治參與有顯著的直接影響。討論網絡異質性同時為Facebook積極/消極政治使用對Facebook政治參與及線下政治參與的中介與調節變項，換言之，Facebook政治使用透過使用者的異質性討論對政治參與產生間接影響，且在討論網絡異質性高的人身上，Facebook政治使用提升Facebook政治參與的正面效益最大，但同時對線下政治參與的負面效力也最強。而就「數位原住民」及「數位移民」的樣本各別進行分析，本研究發現兩樣本中Facebook積極政治使用對政治參與皆有較大影響，Facebook消極政治使用唯有對「數位移民」的Facebook政治參與產生極小的顯著影響，對「數位原住民」的Facebook政治參與、線下政治參與則皆無顯著影響。此外，對於「數位原住民」來說，Facebook積極政治使用對政治參與的影響，會因「討論網絡異質性」而有所不同，然而此交互作用關係在「數位移民」的樣本中則不存在。
    It is clear that social media, especially Facebook, are pervading all sectors of society in Taiwan, particularly among young people.With social media becoming an integral part of individual’s most common political information sources which had gradually replaced traditional news medias, the potential power of social media to trigger users to participate in political activity worth further investigations.This article distinguishes the youth aged 18-35, which are defined as “Digital natives”, from other cohorts called “Digital immigrants” in terms of the differences in Facebook political use, discussion network status and political participating behaviors on Facebook platforms and offline settings.

    Findings suggest that positive Facebook political use plays a crucial role in directly affecting two forms of political participation while passive Facebook political use brings little effect on the outcome variables. Moreover, it finds that although heterogeous talk mediates the relationship between active/passive Facebook political use and two forms of political participation, it only majorly moderates the effect of active Facebook use on political participation simultaneously.The above-mentioned mediationg effects occurred in both digital natives and the digital immigrants while the moderating effects only occurred within the younger sample.
    參考文獻: 壹、中文文獻
    吳重禮、鄭文智、崔曉倩（2006）。〈交叉網絡與政治參與：2001年縣市長與立法委員選舉的實證研究〉，《人文及社會科學集刊》，18(4)， 599-638。
    林聰吉（2007）。〈社會網絡、政治討論與投票參與〉，《選舉研究》，14(2)， 1-24。
    施琮仁（2015）。〈不同媒體平台對公眾參與科學決策能力之影響：以奈米科技為例。〉，《新聞學研究》，124，165-213。
    施琮仁（2016）。〈社交網站與公眾參與：[Pansci 泛科學臉書專頁]使用者研究〉，《傳播研究與實踐》，6(2)，209-241。
    施琬妤（2015）。〈臉書可以讓我們成為公民嗎？以 Facebook 意見極化探討社群網站政治使用對線下政治參與之影響〉，中華傳播學會2015年年會論文。.
    曹家榮（2015年8月2日）。〈從太陽花到反課綱，數位原民們正在改變我們〉。 上網日期：2016年7月2日，取自http://www.thinkingtaiwan.com/content/4387
    張佑宗（2004）。〈社會關係網絡與投票抉擇：人際溝通、社會脈絡與社會組織對台灣2004年總統選舉選民投票抉擇的影響。〉（行政院國家科學委員會專題研究成果報告，NSC92-2414-H-002-043）。台北市：臺灣大學政治學系暨研究所。
    張佑宗、趙珮如（2006）。〈社會脈絡、個人網絡與台灣2004年立法委員選舉選民的投票抉擇〉，《臺灣民主季刊》，3(2)，1-38。
    劉正山（2011）。〈媒體與社群：一個政治傳播學者眼中的脈絡〉，《傳播研究與實踐》，1(2)，75-82。
    創市際 （2016年6月17日）。〈comScore與創市際依據comScore MMX™數據公佈2016年03月台灣網路活動分析報告〉。上網日期：2016年6月22日，取自 http://www.ixresearch.com/news/comscore。
    TWNIC財團法人台灣網路資訊中心（2014年3月20日）。〈TWNIC｢2014 網際網路趨勢研討會｣ 行動連結新世代 網路應用如影隨形〉。上網日期：2016年6月5日，取自http://www.twnic.net.tw/NEWS4/133.pdf。
    貳、英文文獻
    Alexa. (2015, March 16). The top 500 sites on the web. [Web blog message] Retrieved from http://www.alexa.com/topsites

    Alexa. (2015, March 16). Top sties Taiwan. [Web blog message] Retrieved from http://www.alexa.com/topsites/countries/TW
    Bakker, T. P., & Vreese, C. H. d. (2011). Good news for the future? Young people, Internet use, and political participation. Communication Research, 1-20.
    Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173-1182.
    Barabas, J. (2004). How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98(04), 687-701.
    Baumgartner, J. C., & Morris, J. S. (2010). MyFaceTube politics: Social networking web sites and political engagement of young adults. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 22-44.
    Beaudoin, Christopher E. (2011). News effects on bonding and bridging social capital: An empirical study relevant to ethnicity in the united states. Communication Research, 38(2), 155-178.
    Bennett, Sue, Maton, Karl A., & Kervin, Lisa. (2008). Th e `digital natives` debate: a critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775-786.
    Berelson, B. (1954).Voting: A study of opinion formation in a presidential campaign. University of Chicago Press.
    Best, S. J., Chmielewski, B., & Krueger, B. S. (2005). Selective exposure to online foreign news during the conflict with Iraq. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(4), 52-70.
    Bode, L., Vraga, E. K., Borah, P., & Shah, D. V. (2014). A new space for political behavior: Political social networking and its democratic consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 414-429.
    Brandtzæg, P. B. (2012). Social networking sites: Their users and social implications ─ A longitudinal study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 467-488.
    Bruns, A. (2008).Blogs, Wikipedia, Second Life, and beyond: From production to produsage (Vol. 45). Peter Lang.
    Brundidge, J. (2006, June). The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks: Does the medium matter. In International Communication Association Conference, Dresden, Germany.
    Brundidge, J. (2010). Encountering“differnce” in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. Journal of Communication, 60, 680-700.
    Brundidge, J., & Rice, R. E. (2009). Political engagement online: Do the information rich get richer and the like-minded more similar. In A. Chadwick & P. N. Howard (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Internet Politics (pp. 144-156.): London: Routledge.
    Carlisle, J. E., & Patton, R. C. (2013). Is social media changing how we understand political engagement? An analysis of Facebook and the 2008 presidential election. Political Research Quarterly, 66(4), 883-895.
    Cappella, J. N., Price, V., & Nir, L. (2002). Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: Electronic dialogue during campaign 2000. Political Communication, 19, 73-93.
    Chaffee, Steven H., & Schleuder, Joan D. (1986). Measurement and effects of attention to media news. Human Communication Research, 13(1), 76-107.
    Chen, G. M. (2015). Why do women bloggers use social media? Recreation and information motivations outweigh engagement motivations. New media & society, 17(1), 24-40.
    Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R model of communication effects. Communication Theory 19, 66-88.
    Christensen, H. S. (2011). Political activities on the Internet: Slacktivism or political participation by other means?. First Monday, 16(2).
    Cogburn, D. L., & Espinoza-Vasquez, F. K. (2011). From networked nominee to networked nation: Examining the impact of web 2.0 and social media on political participation and civic engagement in the 2008 Obama campaign. Journal of Political Marketing, 10(1-2), Journal of Political Marketing.
    Conroy, M., Feezell, J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1535-1546.
    Dahlgren, P. (2005). The intemet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Politicat Communicatio, 22, 147-162.
    Dewey, J. (1927). The public and its problems. New York, NY: Holt.
    eMarketer (2011), Social Media Outlook for 2011, eMarketer Webinar, available at: www.emarketer.com
    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.
    Eveland, W. P., Shah, D. V., & Kwak, N. (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.
    Eveland, W. P. & Hively, M. H. (2009). Political discussion frequency, network size, and“Heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. Journal of Communication ISSN 0021-9916, 59, 205-224.
    Festinger, Leon. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    Feldman, L., & Price, V. (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.
    Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56-80.
    Friedman, Thomas Loren. (2016, February 16). Social media: destroyer or creator? [Online forum comment] Retrieved from http://cn.nytimes.com/opinion/2016 -0216/c16friedman/en-us/
    Gastil, J., & Dillard, J. P. (1999). Increasing political sophistication through public deliberation. Political Communication, 16, 3-23.
    Garrett, R. K. (2006). Seeking similarity, not avoiding difference: Reframing the selective exposure debate Paper presented at the The 56th annual conference of the international communication association, Dresden, Germany.
    Garrett, R. K. (2009a). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59, 676-699.
    Garrett, R. K. (2009b). Echo chambers online?: Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users1. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 14(2), 265-285.
    Gil de Zúñiga, Bachmann, I., Hsu, S.-H., & Brundidge, J. (2013). Expressive versus consumptive blog use: Implications for interpersonal discussion and political participation International Journal of Communication, 7, 1538-1559.
    Gil de Zúñiga, & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: Online and offline networks, weak ties, and civic engagement. Communication Research, 38(3), 397-421.
    Gil de Zúñiga, Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals` social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 319-336.
    Gil de Zúñiga, Molyneux, L., & Zheng, P. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 612-634.
    Goldman, S. K., & Mutz, D. C. (2011). The friendly media phenomenon: A cross-national analysis of cross-cutting exposure. 28(1), 42-66.
    Gustafsson, N. (2012). The subtle nature of Facebook politics: Swedish social network site users and political participation. New Media & Society, 14(7), 1111-1127.
    Grömping, M. (2014). `Echo chambers`: Partisan Facebook groups during the 2014 Thai election. Asia Pacific Media Educator, 24(1), 39-59.
    Hanson, G., Haridakis, P. M., Cunningham, A. W., Sharma, R., & Ponder, J. D. (2010). The 2008 presidential campaign: Political cynicism in the age of Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube. Mass Communication and Society, 13, 584-607.
    Hayes, A. F. (2007). Exploring the forms of self-censorship: On the spiral of silence and the use of opinion expression avoidance strategies. Journal of Communication, 57, 785-802.
    Hayes, Andrew F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the new millennium. Communication monographs, 76(4), 408-420.
    Hayes, Andrew F., & Preacher, Kristopher J. (2014). Statistical mediation analysis with a multicategorical independent variable. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 67, 451-470.
    Hayes, Andrew F., Preacher, Kristopher J., & Myers, Teresa A. (2011). Mediation and the Estimation of Indirect Effects in Political Communication Research Sourcebook for political communication research: Methods, measures, and analytical techniques (pp. 434-465).
    Hardy, Bruce W., & Scheufele, Dietram A. (2005). Examining differential gains from Internet use: Comparing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 71-84.
    Himelboim, I., McCreery, S., & Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine Cross-ideology exposure on twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 154-174.
    Howard, E. (2014, 24 Septembe). How `clicktivism` has changed the face of political campaigns, The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.theguardian.com/soci -ety/2014/sep/24/clicktivism-changed-political-campaigns-38-degrees-chang -e
    Hively, M. H., & Eveland, W. P. (2009). Contextual antecedents and political consequences of adolescent political discussion, discussion elaboration, and network diversity. Political Communication, 26, 30-47.
    Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1987). Networks in context: The social flow of political information. American Political Science Review, 81(4), 1197-1216.
    Huckfeldt, R., & Spragu, J. (1995). Citizens, politics and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Huckfeldt, R., Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2004). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25(1), 65-95.
    Huckfeldt, Robert, & Mendez, Jeanette Morehouse. (2008). Moths, flames, and political engagement: Managing disagreement within communication networks. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 83-96.
    Huckfeldt, R., Ikeda, K. i., & Pappi, F. U. (2005). Patterns of disagreement in democratic politics: Comparing Germany, Japan, and the United states. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 497-514.
    Ikeda, K. i., & Boase, J. (2011). Multiple Discussion networks and their consequence for political participation. Communication Research, 38(5), 660-683.
    Iyengar, Shanto, & Hahn, Kyu S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59, 19-39.
    Iyengar, Shanto, Hahn, Kyu S., Krosnick, Jon A., & Walker, John. (2008). Selective exposure to campaign communication: The role of anticipated agreement and issue public membership. The Journal of Politics, 70(1), 1866-1200.
    Jang, S. M. (2014). Seeking congruency or incongruency online?: Examining selective exposure to four controversial science issues. Science Communication, 36(2), 143-167.
    Jang, S.-J. (2009). Are Diverse political networks always bad for participatory democracy? : Indifference, alienation, and political disagreements. American Politics Research, 37(5), 879-898.
    Johnson, T. J., Bichard, S. L., & Zhang, W. (2009). Communication communities or “Cyberghettos？”A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 60-82.
    Jomini Stroud, N. (2007). Media effects, selective exposure, and Fahrenheit 9/11. Political Communication, 24(4), 415-432.
    Jun, Najin. (2012). Contribution of Internet news use to reducing the influence of selective online exposure on political diversity. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1450-1457.
    Jung, N., Kim, Y., & Gil de Zúñiga. (2011). The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 14, 407-430.
    Kim, Y. (2011). The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: The relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 971-977.
    Kim, J. Y., Chung, N., & Ahn, K. M. (2014). Why people use social networking services in Korea: The mediating role of self-disclosure on subjective well-being. Information Development, 30(3), 276-287.
    Kim, Y. M., Wang, M., Gotlieb, M. R., Gabay, I., & Edgerly, S. (2013). Ambivalence reduction and polarization in the aampaign information environment: The interaction between individual- and contextual-level influences. Communication Research, 40(3), 388-416.
    Kim, E., Scheufele, D., & Han, J. Y. (2011). Structure or predisposition? Exploring the interaction effect of discussion orientation and discussion heterogeneity on political participation. Mass Communication and Society, 14(4), 502-526.
    Kim, Y., Chen, H.-T., & Gil de Zúñiga. (2013). Stumbling upon news on the Internet: Effects of incidental news exposure and relative entertainment use on political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2607-2614.
    Kim, Y., Hsu, S.-H., & Gil de Zúñiga. (2013). Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Communication, 63, 498-516.
    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.
    Kirk, R., & Schill, D. (2011). A digital agora: Citizen participation in the 2008 presidential debates. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(3), 325-347.
    Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2011). Reinforcement of the political self through selective exposure to political messages. Journal of Communication 61, 349-368.
    Kobayashi, T. (2010). Bridging social capital in online communities: Heterogeneity and social tolerance of online game players in Japan. Human Communication Research, 36(4), 546-569.
    Koch, R., & Lockwood, G. (2011). Superconnect: Harnessing the power of networks and the strength of weak links: Random House Digital, Inc.
    Kruikemeier, S., Noort, G. v., Vliegenthart, R., & Vreese, C. H. d. (2014). Unraveling the effects of active and passive forms of political Internet use: Does it affect citizens` political involvement? New Media & Society, 16(6), 903-920.
    Kushin, M. J., & Kitchener, K. (2009). Getting political on social network sites： Exploring online political discourse on Facebook. First Monday, 14(11-2).
    Kushin, M. J., & Yamamoto, M. (2010). Did social media really matter? : College students` use of online media and politial decision making in the 2008 election. Mass Communication and Society, 13, 608-630.
    Kwak, N., Williams, A. E., Wang, X., & 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.
    Lake, R. L. D., & Huckfeldt, R. (1998). Social capital, social networks, and political participation. Political Psychology, 19(3), 567-584.
    Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1968). The people`s choice; how the voter makes up his mind in a presidential campaign. New York: Columbia University Press.
    Lee, N.-J., Shah, D. V., & McLeod, J. M. (2013). Processes of political socialization: A communication mediation approach to youth civic engagement. Communication Research, 40(5), 669-697.
    Lee, J. K., Choi, J., Kim, C., & Kim, Y. (2014). Social media, network heterogeneity, and opinion polarization. Journal of Communication.
    Lee, F. L. F. (2009). The impact of political discussion in a democratizing society: The moderating role of disagreement and support for democracy. Communication Research, 36(3), 379-399.
    Leighley, J. E. (1990). Social interaction and contextual influences on political participation. American Politics Research, 18(4), 459-475.
    Lin, K.-Y., & Lu, H.-P. (2011). Why people use social networking sites: An empirical study integrating network externalities and motivation theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 1152-1161.
    Lin, Jih-Hsuan. (2016). Differential gains in SNSs: effects of active vs. passive Facebook political participation on offline political participation and voting behavior among first-time and experienced voters. Asian Journal of Communication, 26(3), 278-297.
    Liu, F. C. S., & Chiu, A. S. Y. (2011). Network heterogeneity, partisan defection, and voter turnout: Examine theory with empirical data from Taiwan International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(19).
    Livingstone, Sonia. (2007). The challenge of engaging youth online: Contrasting producers` and teenagers` interpretations of websites. European journal of communication, 22(2), 165-184.
    Markus, Hazel, & Zajonc, Robert Bolesław. (1985). The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 137-229). New York: Random House.
    McClurg, Scott D. (2006a). 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.
    McClurg, Scott D. (2006b). Political disagreement in context: The conditional effect of neighborhood context, disagreement and political talk on electoral participation. Political Behavior (28), 349-366.
    McLeod, Jack M., & McDonald, Daniel G. (1985). Beyond simple exposure media orientations and their impact on political processes. Communication Research, 12(1), 3-33.
    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.
    McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., Moy, P., Horowitz, E. M., Holbert, R. L., Zhang, W.,... & Zubric, J. (1999). Understanding deliberation the effects of discussion networks on participation in a public forum. Communication Research, 26(6), 743-774.
    McPherson, Miller, Smith-Lovin, Lynn, & Cook, James M. (2001). Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks. 27, 415-444. Hardy
    Mitchell, Amy, Mitchell, Jeffrey Gottfried, & Matsa, Katerina Eva. (2015). Millennials and political news: Social media - the local TV for the next generation? Retrived from: http://www.journalism.org/2015/06/01/political-interest-and-awareness-lower-among-millennials/
    Moeller, J., Vreese, C. d., Esser, F., & Kunz, R. (2014). Pathway to political participation: The influence of online and offline news media on internal efficacy and turnout of first-time voters. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(5), 689-700.
    Moy, P., & Gastil, J. (2006). Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions. Political Communication, 23(4), 443-460.
    Mutz, D. C. (2002a). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 838-855.
    Mutz, D. C. (2002b). Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice. American Political Science Review, 96(1), 111-126.
    Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    Mutz, D. C., & Mondak, J. J. (2006). The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse. Journal of Politics, 68(1), 140-155.
    Mutz, D. C., & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95(1), 97-114.
    Nir, L. (2005). Ambivalent social networks and their consequences for participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 17(4), 422-442.
    Nir, L. (2011). Disagreement and opposition in social networks: Does disagreement discourage turnout? Political Studies, 59, 674-692.
    Nisbet, M. C., & Scheufele, D. A. (2004). Political talk as a catalyst for online citizenship. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 81(4), 877-896.
    O`Reilly, T. (2005, 09/30/2005). What is web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software, Retrived from http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/web2/archive/what-is-web-20.html
    Orchard, L. J., Fullwood, C., Galbraith, N., & Morris, N. (2014). Individual differences as predictors of social networking. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 388-402.
    Östman, J. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user- generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people. New Media & Society, 14(6), 1004-1021.
    Papacharissi, Z. (2002). The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere. New Media & Society, 4(1), 9-27.
    Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2011). Toward a new(er) sociability: uses, gratifications and social capital on Facebook. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media Perspectives for the 21st Century (pp. 212-230). New York: Routledge.
    Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin UK.
    Park, N., Kee, K. F., & Valenzuela, S. n. (2009). Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyber sychology & Behavior, 12(6).
    Park, K.-G., Han, S., & Kaid, L. L. (2012). Does social networking service usage mediate the association between smartphone usage and social capital? New Media & Society, 15(7), 1077-1093.
    Prensky, Marc. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1.
    Price, V., & Cappella, J. N. (2002). Online deliberation and its influence: The electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000. IT&SOCIETY,, 1(1), 303-329
    Putnam, R. D. (1995a). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. Political Science and Politics, 28(4), 664-683.
    Putnam, R. (1995b). Bowling alone: America`s declining social capital Jouenal of Democeacy, 6(1), 65-78.
    Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science Technology Society, 30(5), 350-361.
    Quintelier, Ellen. (2007). Differences in political participation between young and old people. Contemporary politics, 13(2), 165-180.
    Quintelier, Ellen, & Vissers, Sara. (2008). The effect of Internet use on political participation: An analysis of survey results for 16-year-olds in Belgium. Social Science Computer Review.
    Quintelier, E., Stolle, D., & Harell, A. (2012). Politics in peer groups: Exploring the causal relationship between network diversity and political participation. Political Research Quarterly, 65(4), 868-881.
    Rains, S. A., & Brunner, S. R. (2015). What can we learn about social network sites by studying Facebook? A call and recommendations for research on social network sites. New media & society, 17(1), 114-131.
    Rainie, L., & Smith, A. (2012). Social networking sites and politics Pew Research Center`s Internet & American Life Project. Washington, D.C.
    Resnick, P., Garrett, R. K., Kriplean, T., Munson, S. A., & Stroud, N. J. (2013, February). Bursting your (filter) bubble: strategies for promoting diverse exposure. In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work companion (pp. 95-100). ACM.
    Scacco, J. M., & Peacock, C. (2014). The cross-pressured citizen in the 2012 presidential campaign：Formative factors and media choice behavior. American Behavioral Scientist, 58(9), 1214-1235.
    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.
    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.
    Schudson, M. (1998). The good citizen: A history of American life. New York, NY: Free Press.
    Shah, Dhavan V., McLeod, Jack M., & Yoon, So-Hyang. (2001). Communication, context, and community: An exploration of print, broadcast, and Internet influences. Communication Research, 28(4), 464-506.
    Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Eveland, W. P., & Kwak, N. (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation. Communication Research, 32(5).
    Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Nah, S., Gotlieb, M. R., Hwang, H., Lee, N.-J., . . . McLeod, D. M. (2007). Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: Extending the communication mediation model. Journal of Communication, 57, 676-703.
    Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 434-445.
    Stockmann, Daniela. (2009). One size doesn`t fit all: Measuring news reception east and west. Chinese Journal of Communication, 2(2), 140-157.
    Stroud, N. J. (2008). Media use and political predispositions: Revisiting the concept of selective exposure. Political Behavior, 30(3), 341-366.
    Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
    Suksa-ngiam, W., & Chaiyasoonthorn, W. (2014). The adoption of social media by Thai university students: Multiple group moderating effects. Information Development, 1(14).
    Tang, G., & Lee, F. L. F. (2013). Facebook use and political participation: The impact of exposure to shared political information, connections with public political actors, and network structural heterogeneity. Social Science Computer Review, 31(6), 763-773.
    Theocharis, Y., & Quintelier, E. (2014). Stimulating citizenship or expanding entertainment? The effect of Facebook on adolescent participation. New Media & Society, 1-20.
    Tufekci, Zeynep, & Wilson, Christopher. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir square. Journal of Communication, 62, 363-379.
    Ulbig, S. G., & Funk, C. L. (1999). Conflict avoidance and political participation. Political Behavior, 21(3).
    Valenzuela, S., Arriagada, A., & Scherman, A. (2012). The social media basis of youth protest behavior: The case of Chile. Journal of Communication, 62(2), 299-314.
    Valenzuela, S. n., Kim, Y., & Gil de Zúñiga. (2012). Social networks that matter: Exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(2), 163-184.
    Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2008). Lessons from Facebook：The effect of social network sites on college students` social capital. The 9th International Symposium on Online Journalism
    Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network site?: Facebook use and college students` life satisfaction, trust, and participation1. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875-901.
    Van Alstyne, M., & Brynjolfsson, E. (1996, December). Electronic communities: global village or cyberbalkans?. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Information Systems. New York: Wiley.
    Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in american politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    Vitak, J., Zube, P., Smock, A., Carr, C. T., Ellison, N., & Lampe, C. (2011). It`s complicated: Facebook users` political participation in the 2008 election. Cyber sychology & Behavior, 14(3).
    Vromen, A., Xenos, M. A., & Loader, B. (2015). Young people, social media and connective action: from organisational maintenance to everyday political talk.Journal of Youth Studies, 18(1), 80-100.
    Wang, S.-I. (2007). Political use of the Internet, political attitudes and political participation. Asian Journal of Communication, 17(4), 381-395.
    Westerhout, T. (2012). Hitting the `Like` button and bridging the social capital: The impact of Facebook use on `thin social trust` and levels of political tolerance. Bachelor, Leiden University.
    Wojcieszak, M. E., & Mutz, D. C. (2009). Online groups and political discourse: Do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? Journal of Communication, 59, 40-56.
    Wojcieszak, M. (2011). Deliberation and attitude polarization. Journal of Communication, 61, 596-617.
    Wyatt, R. O., Kim, J., & Katz, E. (2000). How feeling free to talk affects ordinary political conversation, purposeful argumentation, and civic participation. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(1), 99-114.
    Yamamoto, M., & Kushin, M. J. (2014). More harm than good? Online media use and political disaffection among college students in the 2008 election. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 430-445.
    Zhang, W., Johnson, T. J., Seltzer, T., & Bichard, S. L. (2010). The revolution will be networked：The influence of social networking sites on political attitudes and behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 28(1), 75-92.
    Zhang, Y., & Leung, L. (2014). A review of social networking service (SNS) research in communication journals from 2006 to 2011. New Media & Society, 1-18.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    新聞學系
    101451007
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G1014510071
    資料類型: thesis
    顯示於類別:[新聞學系] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    007101.pdf1964KbAdobe PDF21619檢視/開啟


    在政大典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回饋