Mobile communication and political participation in South Korea: Examining the intersections between informational and relational uses

This study aims to extend the literature on mobile communication by demonstrating that multifaceted mobile practices work in coordination with one another to predict enhanced engagement in public life. Using a national survey of adults in South Korea, we show that informational mobile phone use to gather and discuss content about news and public affairs is positively associated with political participation while the corresponding link for relational mobile phone use to enhance strong personal tie relationships being also significant. More importantly, the findings indicate that the two mobile usage patterns interact with each other to explain increased involvement in political activities. However, analysis of the three-way interaction points to a noteworthy caveat, namely that those who are already engaged, by virtue of their perceived capacity to produce desired outcomes in politics (i.e., self-efficacy), are even more likely to obtain motivational benefits from the manifold uses of mobile telephony.

[1]  Ludwig Bstieler,et al.  Influence of Tie Strength and Behavioural Factors on Effective Knowledge Acquisition: A Study of Korean New Product Alliances , 2008 .

[2]  Homero Gil de Zúñiga,et al.  Social Media Use for News and Individuals' Social Capital, Civic Engagement and Political Participation , 2012, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[3]  Michael Chan,et al.  The Role of Political Efficacy on the Relationship Between Facebook Use and Participatory Behaviors: A Comparative Study of Young American and Chinese Adults , 2013, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[4]  R. Huckfeldt,et al.  Citizens, Politics and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign , 1995 .

[5]  Karen Wright,et al.  Book Review: Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Robert D. Putnam. Simon and Shuster, New York, 2000 , 2001 .

[6]  Rowan Wilken,et al.  Bonds and Bridges: Mobile Phone Use and Social Capital Debates , 2011 .

[7]  Raymond J. Pingree.  Effects of Unresolved Factual Disputes in the News on Epistemic Political Efficacy , 2011 .

[8]  Nojin Kwak,et al.  Mobile Communication and Civil Society: Linking Patterns and Places of Use to Engagement with Others in Public , 2011 .

[9]  Young-Ju Cho,et al.  Collectivism and Individualism as Bicultural Values: South Korean Undergraduates' Adjustment to College , 2010 .

[10]  Jennifer Brundidge.  Encountering "Difference" in the contemporary public sphere: The contribution of the internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks , 2010 .

[11]  Nojin Kwak,et al.  Revisiting the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis , 1999 .

[12]  J. Knote.  Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community , 2004 .

[13]  Lincoln Dahlberg.  The Internet and Democratic Discourse: Exploring The Prospects of Online Deliberative Forums Extending the Public Sphere , 2001 .

[14]  Scott W. Campbell,et al.  Political Involvement in “Mobilized” Society: The Interactive Relationships Among Mobile Communication, Network Characteristics, and Political Participation , 2011 .

[15]  Scott W. Campbell,et al.  Mobile Communication and Civic Life: Linking Patterns of Use to Civic and Political Engagement , 2010 .

[16]  H. Bonfadelli,et al.  Mass Media Flow and Differential Growth in Knowledge , 2016 .

[17]  P. Norris.  Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide , 2001 .

[18]  R. Garrett.  Politically Motivated Reinforcement Seeking: Reframing the Selective Exposure Debate , 2009 .

[19]  K. Gergen.  Mobile Communication and the Transformation of the Democratic Process , 2008 .

[20]  Hoon Lee,et al.  Hearing the Other Side Revisited: The Joint Workings of Cross-Cutting Discussion and Strong Tie Homogeneity in Facilitating Deliberative and Participatory Democracy , 2015, Commun. Res..

[21]  R. Lance Holbert,et al.  A Theory of Political Campaign Media Connectedness , 2009 .

[22]  Jingbo Meng,et al.  Selective Exposure to Attitude-Consistent and Counterattitudinal Political Information , 2011 .

[23]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Social networks and Internet connectivity effects , 2005 .

[24]  Mark S. Granovetter.  The Strength of Weak Ties , 1973, American Journal of Sociology.

[25]  Jonathon N. Cummings,et al.  Internet Paradox Revisited , 2002 .

[26]  Yonghwan Kim,et al.  The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: The relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives , 2011, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[27]  Henry E. Brady,et al.  Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics , 1996 .

[28]  Jennifer Stromer-Galley,et al.  Diversity of Political Conversation on the Internet: Users' Perspectives , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[29]  Laza Kekic,et al.  The Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy , 2006 .

[30]  C. Sunstein.  Republic.com , 2001 .

[31]  A. Bandura.  SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY , 2008 .

[32]  J. Krosnick,et al.  National Surveys Via Rdd Telephone Interviewing Versus the Internet Comparing Sample Representativeness and Response Quality , 2009 .

[33]  Brian S. Krueger.  Assessing the Potential of Internet Political Participation in the United States , 2002 .

[34]  H. Geser.  :New Tech, New Ties: How Mobile Communication Is Reshaping Social Cohesion , 2009 .

[35]  Jörg Matthes,et al.  Exposure to Counterattitudinal News Coverage and the Timing of Voting Decisions , 2012, Commun. Res..

[36]  BarabasJason.  Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy. , 2015 .

[37]  Jay D. Hmielowski.  Intramedia Moderation, Electoral Ambivalence, and Electoral Decision Making , 2012 .

[38]  Diana C. Mutz,et al.  Facilitating Communication across Lines of Political Difference: The Role of Mass Media , 2001, American Political Science Review.

[39]  M. McPherson,et al.  Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks , 2001 .

[40]  M. D. Carpini.  Gen.com: Youth, Civic Engagement, and the New Information Environment , 2000 .

[41]  Meital Balmas,et al.  When Fake News Becomes Real , 2014, Commun. Res..

[42]  A. Bandura.  Growing primacy of human agency in adaptation and change in the electronic era , 2002 .

[43]  Steven J. Rosenstone,et al.  Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America , 1993 .

[44]  Delbert Miller,et al.  Power and Democracy in America. , 2011 .

[45]  Junho Choi,et al.  Mobile communication and public affairs engagement in Korea: an examination of non-linear relationships between mobile phone use and engagement across age groups , 2011 .

[46]  J. Coleman.  Foundations of Social Theory , 1990 .

[47]  Hyeryoung Ok,et al.  New Media Practices in Korea , 2011 .

[48]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media , 2002, Inf. Soc..

[49]  H. G. D. Zúñiga,et al.  Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits , 2013 .

[50]  Dhavan V. Shah,et al.  Connecting, Trusting, and Participating: The Direct and Interactive Effects of Social Associations , 2004 .