Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Political Behavior
Published in: Political Behavior 3/2018

12-07-2017 | Original Paper

From Respondents to Networks: Bridging Between Individuals, Discussants, and the Network in the Study of Political Discussion

Authors: Matthew T. Pietryka, Jack Lyons Reilly, Daniel M. Maliniak, Patrick R. Miller, Robert Huckfeldt, Ronald B. Rapoport

Published in: Political Behavior | Issue 3/2018

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Much of our understanding of social influence in individual political behavior stems from representative surveys asking respondents to identify characteristics of a small number of people they talk to most frequently. By focusing only on these few close contacts, we have implicitly assumed that less-intimate associates and features of network structure hold little influence over others’ attitudes and behavior. We test these assumptions with a survey that attempted to interview all students at a small university during a highly-salient municipal election. By focusing on a small, well-defined community, we are able to explore the relationship between individuals, their close associates, and also less-immediate associates. We are also able to explore features of network structure unobtainable in representative samples. We demonstrate that these less-immediate associates and network features have the potential to exert important influence that conventional survey approaches would miss.
previous article The Exaggerated Life of Death Panels? The Limited but Real Influence of Elite Rhetoric in the 2009–2010 Health Care Debate
next article Ideology and Vote Choice in U.S. Mayoral Elections: Evidence from Facebook Surveys

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
The study was approved by the College of William & Mary IRB on Human Subjects, PHSC-2010-03-04-6495-rbrapo.
 
2
In total, 1833 of the 5836 undergraduates provided at least one friend’s full name in the name generator, yielding an AAPOR non-probability internet panel participation rate of 31% (The American Association for Public Opinion Research 2015, 40).
 
3
We rely on a database produced by the Williamsburg Voter Registrar including all registered voters, their date of registration, date of birth, address, and voting history. We used first and last names to find all potential matches between individuals in our student sample and those registered to vote.  In each case, we used both the date of birth as well as the address to help confirm that a matched name corresponded to a student. According to Ansolabehere and Hersh (2010) summary measure, Virginia maintains some of the highest-quality registration records in the US.
 
4
Indegree provides a better measure of global centrality than either of its variants: outdegree and total degree. In this case, outdegree is equal to the number of people an individual names as friends. Outdegree is thus limited only to survey respondents and provides little variation (as described above, 78% of students responding to the name generator identified the maximum five friends). Total degree is also problematic because it equals the sum of indegree and outdegree. For non-respondents, this sum is always the same as indegree, but for respondents, it is an average of 4.6 units greater than their indegree. Thus, total degree conflates popularity and survey participation.
 
5
Alternatively, the local clustering coefficient would provide a measure of the uniqueness or redundancy of friends. We rely instead on the two-step neighborhood density because it captures uniqueness or redundancy of not only friends (Zone 1), but also second-order friends (Zone 2).
 
6
All tables in this manuscript were originally typeset using the texreg package in R (Leifeld 2013).
 
7
This indicator variable is constructed from an item asking, “Have you ever attended an off-campus party where the police issued a citation to you or someone else at that party for violating the noise ordinance?”.
 
8
This and all other reported predictions and confidence intervals come from simulations from the posterior (Gelman and Hill 2007), setting other covariates to their medians.
 
9
These means are equal to the number of friends in the zone who state that they have been to a party cited by police for violating the noise ordinance, divided by the number of friends in the zone.
 
10
The other controls are the respondent’s interest in national politics (“In general how interested are you in national politics?”), family economic status (“How would you describe your family's economic status?”), and indicators of race and gender.
 
11
Zone 1’s mean turnout is equal to the number of validated voters in the respondent’s Zone 1 network, divided by the total number of friends in Zone 1. An analogous Zone 2 measure is introduced in Table 4, Model 3.
 
Literature
Ansolabehere, S., & Hersh, E. (2012). Validation: What big data reveal about survey misreporting and the real electorate. Political Analysis, 20(4), 437–459.CrossRef
Berelson, B. F., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. (1954). Voting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burden, B. C. (2000). Voter turnout and the national election studies. Political Analysis, 8(4), 389–398.CrossRef
Burt, R. S. (1986). A note on sociometric order in the General Social Survey Network Data. Social Networks, 8, 149–174.CrossRef
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American voter. New York: Wiley.
Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an Online Social Network Experiment. Science, 329(5996), 1194–1197.CrossRef
Centola, D., & Macy, M. (2007). Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 702–734.CrossRef
Christakis, N. A., & Fowler, J. H. (2008). The collective dynamics of smoking in a Large Social Network. New England Journal of Medicine, 358(21), 2249–2258.CrossRef
Costenbader, E., & Valente, T. W. (2003). The stability of centrality measures when networks are sampled. Social Networks, 25(4), 283–307.CrossRef
Eveland, W. P., Hutchens, M. J., & Morey, A. C. (2013). Political network size and its antecedents and consequences. Political Communication, 30(3), 371–394.CrossRef
Eveland, W. P., & Kleinman, S. B. (2011). Comparing general and political discussion networks within voluntary organizations using social network analysis. Political Behavior, 35(1), 65–87.CrossRef
Fowler, J. H., et al. (2011). Causality in political networks. American Politics Research, 39(2), 437–480.CrossRef
Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2007). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360–1380.CrossRef
Granovetter, M. (1985). Economic action and social structure: The problem of embeddedness. American Journal of Sociology, 91, 481–510.CrossRef
Groves, R. M., Presser, S., & Dipko, S. (2004). The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opinion Quarterly, 68(1), 2–31.CrossRef
Hill, R. A., & Dunbar, R. I. M. (2003). Social network size in humans. Human Nature, 14(1), 53–72.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R. (1979). Political participation and the neighborhood social context. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 579–592.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R. (1983). Social contexts, social networks, and urban neighborhoods: environmental constraints on friendship choice. American Journal of Sociology, 89, 651–669.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., Ikeda, K., & Pappi, F. (2005). Patterns of disagreement in democratic politics: Comparing Germany, Japan, and the United States. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 497–514.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2002). Political environments, political dynamics, and the survival of disagreement. The Journal of Politics, 64(01), 1–21.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2004). Political disagreement: The survival of diverse opinions within communication networks. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., & Mendez, J. M. (2008). Moths, flames, and political engagement: Managing disagreement within communication networks. The Journal of Politics, 70(01), 83–96.CrossRef
Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics, and social communication. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Hurwitz, J., & Peffley, M. (1987). How are foreign policy attitudes structured? A hierarchical model. American Political Science Review, 81(04), 1099–1120.CrossRef
Jan, E. L., & Nagler, J. (2013). Who votes now?: Demographics, issues, inequality, and turnout in the United States. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Key, V. O., Jr. (1949). Southern politics. New York: Knopf.
Klofstad, C. A., Sokhey, A. E., & McClurg, S. D. (2013). Disagreeing about disagreement: How conflict in social networks affects political behavior. American Journal of Political Science, 57(1), 120–134.CrossRef
Langton, K. P., & Rapoport, R. (1975). Social structure, social context, and partisan mobilization: Urban workers in Chile. Comparative Political Studies, 8, 318–344.CrossRef
Laumann, E. O. (1973). Bonds of Pluralism. New York: Wiley.
Lazarsfeld, P. F., Berelson, B. F., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The people’s choice. New York: Columbia University Press.
Lazer, D., Rubineau, B., Chetkovich, C., Katz, N., & Neblo, M. (2010). The coevolution of networks and political attitudes. Political Communication, 27(3), 248–274.CrossRef
Leifeld, P. (2013). Texreg: Conversion of Statistical Model Output in R to \LaTeX and HTML tables. Journal of Statistical Software, 55(8), 1–24.CrossRef
Leighley, J. E., & Nagler, J. (1992). Individual and systemic influences on turnout: Who votes? 1984. The Journal of Politics, 54(03), 718–740.CrossRef
Levitan, L. C., & Visser, P. S. (2009). Social network composition and attitude strength: Exploring the dynamics within newly formed social networks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(5), 1057–1067.CrossRef
Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2014). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using stata (3rd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
Louch, H. (2000). Personal network integration: Transitivity and homophily in strong-tie relations. Social Networks, 22(1), 45–64.CrossRef
Lyons, J., & Sokhey, A. (2014). Emotion, motivation, and social information seeking about politics. Political Communication, 31(2), 237–258.CrossRef
Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122–131.CrossRef
Marsden, P. V. (2003). Interviewer effects in measuring network size using a single name generator. Social Networks, 25(1), 1–16.CrossRef
Matthews, D. R., & Prothro, J. W. (1963). Social and economic factors and Negro voter registration in the South. American Political Science Review, 57, 24–44.CrossRef
McClurg, S. D. (2003). Social networks and political participation: The role of social interaction in explaining political participation. Political Research Quarterly, 56, 448–465.CrossRef
McClurg, S. (2006). Political disagreement in context: The conditional effect of neighborhood context, disagreement and political talk on electoral participation. Political Behavior, 28(4), 349–366.CrossRef
Nickerson, D. W. (2008). Is voting contagious? Evidence from two field experiments. American Political Science Review, 102(01), 49–57.CrossRef
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330.CrossRef
O’Connor, K. M., & Gladstone, E. (2015). How social exclusion distorts social network perceptions. Social Networks, 40, 123–128.CrossRef
Redlawsk, D. P., Civettini, A. J. W., & Emmerson, K. M. (2010). The affective tipping point: Do motivated reasoners ever ‘get it’?: The affective tipping point. Political Psychology, 31(4), 563–593.CrossRef
Roberts, S. G. B., Dunbar, R. I. M., Pollet, T. V., & Kuppens, T. (2009). Exploring variation in active network size: Constraints and ego characteristics. Social Networks, 31(2), 138–146.CrossRef
Ryan, J. B. (2010). The effects of network expertise and biases on vote choice. Political Communication, 27(1), 44–58.CrossRef
Ryan, J. B. (2011). Social networks as a shortcut to correct voting. American Journal of Political Science, 55(4), 753–766.CrossRef
Selb, P., & Munzert, S. (2013). Voter overrepresentation, vote misreporting, and turnout bias in postelection surveys. Electoral Studies, 32(1), 186–196.CrossRef
Simpson, B., Markovsky, B., & Steketee, M. (2011). Power and the perception of social networks. Social Networks, 33(2), 166–171.CrossRef
Sinclair, B. (2012). The social citizen: Peer networks and political behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRef
Sinclair, B., McConnell, M., & Green, D. P. (2012). Detecting spillover effects: Design and analysis of multilevel experiments. American Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 1055–1069.CrossRef
Sokhey, A. E., & McClurg, S. D. (2012). Social networks and correct voting. The Journal of Politics, 74(03), 751–764.CrossRef
Song, H., & Eveland, W. P. (2015). The structure of communication networks matters: How network diversity, centrality, and context influence political ambivalence, participation, and knowledge. Political Communication, 32(1), 83–108.CrossRef
Tingsten, H. (1963). Political Behavior: Studies in Election Statistics. London: P.S. King.
VanderWeele, T. J. (2011). Sensitivity analysis for contagion effects in social networks. Sociological Methods & Research, 40(2), 240–255.CrossRef
Walsh, K. C. (2004). Talking about politics: Informal groups and social identity in American life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Watts, D. J., & Strogatz, S. H. (1998). Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature, 393(6684), 440–442.CrossRef
Wolfinger, R. E., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1980). Who votes?. New Haven: Yale.
Zaller, J. (1992). The nature and origins of mass opinion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
From Respondents to Networks: Bridging Between Individuals, Discussants, and the Network in the Study of Political Discussion
Authors
Matthew T. Pietryka
Jack Lyons Reilly
Daniel M. Maliniak
Patrick R. Miller
Robert Huckfeldt
Ronald B. Rapoport
Publication date
12-07-2017
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Political Behavior / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 0190-9320
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6687
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-017-9419-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Political Behavior 3/2018 Go to the issue

Original Paper

In Capable Hands: An Experimental Study of the Effects of Competence and Consistency on Leadership Approval

Original Paper

Party and Gender Stereotypes in Campaign Attacks

Original Paper

The Exaggerated Life of Death Panels? The Limited but Real Influence of Elite Rhetoric in the 2009–2010 Health Care Debate

Original Paper

Ideology and Vote Choice in U.S. Mayoral Elections: Evidence from Facebook Surveys

Original Paper

Outspoken Insiders: Political Connections and Citizen Participation in Authoritarian China

Original Paper

Feelings of Political Efficacy in the Fifty States