ABSTRACT
People increasingly turn to social media to augment their broadcast viewing experience with a parallel stream of information and opinion. Known as "social watching," the practice of integrating broadcast media and social media has become routine for many citizens tracking live events and breaking news. In a controlled laboratory study, we examined how interactivity and exposure to social media opinions influence a sense of community, attitudes and discussion elaboration. The results suggest that receiving positive feedback to social media posts instills a psychological sense of community in the poster, and this feeling of connectedness is related to greater elaboration of the civic social media discussion. Secondly, the study found support for conformity effects. The third contribution of this work is a better understanding of how the valence of others' social media posts and the user's posting activity influences cognitive elaboration of social media discussions during social watching in civic contexts.
- Robert P. Abelson. 1995. Attitude Extremity. In Attitude Strength: Antecedents and Consequences, Richard E. Petty and Jon A. Krosnick (eds.). New York, NY, 25--42.Google Scholar
- Benedict Anderson. 1983. Imagined Communities. Verso, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Phil Brooker, John Vines, Selina Sutton, Julie Barnett, Tom Feltwell, and Shaun W. Lawson. 2015. Debating poverty porn on Twitter: Social media as a place for everyday socio-political talk. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15), 3177--3186. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jaclyn Cameron and Nick Geidner. 201 Something old, something new, something borrowed from something blue: Experiments on dual viewing TV and Twitter. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 58, 3: 400--419.Google Scholar
- Gina Masullo Chen. 2011. Tweet this: A uses and gratifications perspective on how active Twitter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior 27, 2: 755--762. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Zi Chu, Steven Gianvecchio, Haining Wang, and Sushil Jajodia. 2012. Detecting automation of Twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg? IEEE Trans. Dependable Sec. Comput. 9, 6: 811--824. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robert B. Cialdini, Stephanie L. Brown, Brian P. Lewis, Carol Luce, and Steven L. Neuberg. 199 Reinterpreting the empathy-altruism relationship: When one into one equals oneness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 73, 3: 481--494.Google Scholar
- Morton Deutsch and Harold B. Gerard. 1955. A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 51, 3: 629--636.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nicholas Diakopoulos and David A. Shamma. 2010. Characterizing debate performance via aggregated twitter sentiment. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10), 1195--1198. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sara Douglas, Roxanne B. Raine, Misa Maruyama, Bryan Semaan, and Scott P. Robertson. 2015. Community matters: How young adults use Facebook to evaluate political candidates. Information Polity 20, 2,3: 135--150. http://doi.org/3233/IP-150362Google Scholar
- William P. Eveland. 2001. The cognitive mediation model of learning from the news evidence from nonelection, off-year election, and presidential election contexts. Communication Research 28, 5: 571--601.Google ScholarCross Ref
- William P. Eveland. 2004. The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication 21, 2: 177--193.Google ScholarCross Ref
- William P. Eveland and Tiffany Thomson. 2006. Is it talking, thinking, or both? A lagged dependent variable model of discussion effects on political knowledge. Journal of Communication 56, 3: 523--542.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Leon Festinger, Albert Pepitone, and Theodore M. Newcomb. 1952. Some Consequences of De-individuation in a Group. John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken.Google Scholar
- B.J. Fogg and Clifford Nass. 1997. Silicon sycophants: the effects of computers that flatter. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 46, 5: 551--561. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Deen Freelon and David Karpf. 2014. Of big birds and bayonets: Hybrid Twitter interactivity in the 2012 Presidential debates. Information, Communication & Society 18, 4: 390--406.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Homero Gil de Zúñiga, Victor Garcia-Perdomo, and Shannon C. McGregor. 2015. What is second screening? Exploring motivations of second screen use and its effect on online political participation. Journal of Communication 65, 5: 793--815.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert E. Goodin and Simon J. Niemeyer. 2003. When does deliberation begin? Internal reflection versus public discussion in deliberative democracy. Political Studies 51, 4: 627--649.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nir Grinberg, P. Alex Dow, Lada A. Adamic, and Mor Naaman. 2016. Changes in engagement before and after posting to Facebook. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15). Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anatoliy Gruzd, Barry Wellman, and Yuri Takhteyev. 2011. Imagining Twitter as an imagined community. American Behavioral Scientist 55, 10: 1294--1318.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Curtis D. Hardin and E. Tory Higgins. 1996. Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In Handbook of Motivation and Cognition, Richard M. Sorrentino and E. Tory Higgins (eds.). Guilford Press, New York, NY, 28--84.Google Scholar
- J. Brian Houston, Joshua Hawthorne, and Matthew L. Spialek. 2013. Tweeting during presidential debates: Effect on candidate evaluations and debate attitudes. Argumentation and Advocacy 49 (Spring 2013): 301--311.Google Scholar
- J. Brian Houston, Mitchell S. McKinney, Joshua Hawthorne, and Matthew L. Spialek. 2013. Frequency of tweeting during presidential debates: Effect on debate attitudes and knowledge. Communication Studies 64, 5: 548--560.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. Linlin Huang, Kate Starbird, Mania Orand, Stephanie A. Stanek, and Heather T. Pedersen. 2015. Connected through crisis: Emotional proximity and the spread of misinformation online. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 969--980. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jin Yea Jang, Kyungsik Han, Patrick C. Shih, and Dongwon Lee. 2015. Generation Like: Comparative characteristics in Instagram. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15), 4039--4042. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Se Hoon Jeong and Yoori Hwang. 2012. Does multitasking increase or decrease persuasion? Effects of multitasking on comprehension and counterarguing. Journal of Communication 62, 4: 571--587.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David W. Johnson, Roger T. Johnson, and Karl A. Smith. 2014. Cooperative learning: Improving university instruction by basing practice on validated theory. Journal on Excellence in University Teaching 25, 4: 1--26.Google Scholar
- Philip R. Johnson and Sung-Un Yang. 2009. Uses and gratifications of Twitter: An examination of user motives and satisfaction of Twitter use. In Communication Technology Division of the annual convention of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication (AEJMC).Google Scholar
- Henry F Kaiser. 1974. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 1: 31--36.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Elihu Katz. 1957. The two-step flow of communication: An up-to-date report on an hypothesis. The Public Opinion Quarterly 21, 1, Anniversary Issue Devoted to Twenty Years of Public Opinion Research: 61.Google Scholar
- Jae Won Kim, Dongwoo Kim, Brian Keegan, Joon Hee Kim, Suin Kim, and Alice H. Oh. 2015. Social media dynamics of global co-presence during the 2014 FIFA World Cup. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '15), 2623--2632. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Marina Kogan, Leysia Palen, and Kenneth M. Anderson. 2015. Think local, retweet global: Retweeting by the geographically-vulnerable during Hurricane Sandy. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 981--993. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Gerald M. Kosicki and Jack M. McLeod. 1990. Learning from political news: Effects of media images and information-processing strategies. Mass Communication and Political Information Processing: 69--83.Google Scholar
- Jon A. Krosnick, David S. Boninger, Yao C. Chuang, Matthew K. Berent, and Catherine G. Carnot. 1993. Attitude strength: One construct or many related constructs? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 65, 6: 1132--1151.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yu-Ru Lin, Brian Keegan, Drew Margolin, and David Lazer. 2014. Rising tides or rising stars?: Dynamics of shared attention on Twitter during media events. PLOS ONE 9, 5: e94093.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Misa Maruyama, Scott P. Robertson, Sara K. Douglas, Bryan Semaan, and Heather A. Faucett. 2014. Hybrid media consumption: How tweeting during a televised political debate influences the vote decision. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '14), 1422--1432. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mitchell S. McKinney, J. Brian Houston, and Joshua Hawthorne. 2014. Social watching a 2012 Republican presidential primary debate. American Behavioral Scientist 58, 4: 556--573.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David W. McMillan and David M. Chavis. 1986. Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community Psychology 14, 1: 6--23.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sally J. McMillan. 2006. Exploring models of interactivity from multiple research traditions: Users, documents and systems. In Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Social Consequences of ICTs, Updated Student Edition. SAGE Publications Ltd, London, UK, 205--229.Google Scholar
- Mor Naaman, Jeffrey Boase, and Chih-Hui Lai. 2010. Is it really about me?: Message content in social awareness streams. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '10). Google ScholarDigital Library
- John F. Nestojko, Dung C. Bui, Nate Kornell, and Elizabeth Ligon Bjork. 2014. Expecting to teach enhances learning and organization of knowledge in free recall of text passages. Memory & Cognition 42, 7: 1038--1048.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jeffrey Nichols, Jalal Mahmud, and Clemens Drews. 2012. Summarizing sporting events using Twitter. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI '12), 189--198. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nielsen. 2015. Live TV + social media = engaged viewers.Google Scholar
- Blair Nonnecke, Jennifer Preece, and Dorine Andrews. 2004. What lurkers and posters think of each other. In the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, 9. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch and S. Shyam Sundar. 2015. Posting, commenting, and tagging: Effects of sharing news stories on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior 44: 240--249. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Elizabeth M. Perse. 1990. Involvement with local television news cognitive and emotional dimensions. Human Communication Research 16, 4: 556--581.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. Andrew Peterson, Paul W. Speer, and David W. McMillan. 2008. Validation of a brief sense of community scale: Confirmation of the principal theory of sense of community. Journal of Community Psychology 36, 1: 61--73.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard E. Petty and John T. Cacioppo. 1986. The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion. Springer, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
- Richard E. Petty, John T. Cacioppo, and Jeff A. Kasmer. 2015. The role of affect in the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion. In Communication, Social Cognition and Affect, Lewis Donohew, Howard Sypher and Tory Higgins (eds.), 117--146.Google Scholar
- Tom Postmes, Russell Spears, and Martin Lea. 1998. Breaching or building social boundaries? SIDE-effects of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research 25, 6: 689--715.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jenny Preece. 2001. Sociability and usability in online communities: Determining and measuring success. Behaviour & IT 20, 5: 347--356.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel Ramage, Susan T. Dumais, and Daniel J Liebling. 2010. Characterizing microblogs with topic models. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on the Web and Social Media (ICWSM).Google Scholar
- Alan J. Resnik and Robert B. Cialdini. 1986. Influence: science & practice. Journal of Marketing Research 23, 3: 305.Google Scholar
- Donald B. Rubin. 2005. Causal inference using potential outcomes. Journal of the American Statistical Association 100, 469: 322--331.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Klaus Schoenbach and Holli A. Semetko. 1992. Agenda-setting, agenda-reinforcing or agenda-deflating? A study of the 1990 German national election. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 69, 4: 837--846.Google Scholar
- Bryan Semaan, Heather Faucett, Scott P. Robertson, Misa Maruyama, and Sara Douglas. 2015. Navigating imagined audiences: Motivations for participating in the online public sphere. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW '15), 1158--1169. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tamir Sheafer. 2007. How to evaluate it: The role of story-evaluative tone in agenda setting and priming. Journal of Communication 57, 1: 21--39.Google Scholar
- Robert E. Slavin. 1996. Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educational Psychology 21, 1: 43--69.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jerzy Surma. 2016. Social exchange in online social networks. The reciprocity phenomenon on Facebook. Computer Communications 73: 342--346. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Barbara G. Tabachnick and Linda S. Fidell. 2013. Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson Education, Inc., Boston, MA.Google Scholar
- Jonathon Tudge and Barbara Rogoff. 1999. Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives. In Lev Vygotsky Critical Assessments, P Lloyd and C Fernyhough (eds.). Lev Vygotsky: Critical assessments, New York, NY, 32--56.Google Scholar
- Cristian Vaccari, Andrew Chadwick, and Ben O'Loughlin. 2015. Dual screening the political: Media events, social media, and citizen engagement. Journal of Communication 65, 6: 1041--1061.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Floris M. van Blankenstein, Diana H.J.M. Dolmans, Cees P.M. van der Vleuten, and Henk G. Schmidt. 2011. Which cognitive processes support learning during small-group discussion? The role of providing explanations and listening to others. Instructional Science 39, 2: 189--204.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Anna Van Cauwenberge, Gabi Schaap, and Rob van Roy. 2014. "TV no longer commands our full attention": Effects of second-screen viewing and task relevance on cognitive load and learning from news. Computers in Human Behavior 38: 100--109. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Magdalena Wojcieszak. 2011. Deliberation and attitude polarization. Journal of Communication 61, 4: 596--617.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wu, N. (2007, August 3). Kakaako rich with Hawaiian history. Honolulu Star Bulletin.Google Scholar
- Michele Zappavigna. 2012. Discourse of Twitter and Social Media: How We Use Language to Create Affiliation on the Web. Continuum International Publishing Group, London, United Kingdom. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lixuan Zhang and Iryna Pentina. 2012. Motivations and usage patterns of Weibo. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 15, 6: 312--317.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Social Watching a Civic Broadcast: Understanding the Effects of Positive Feedback and Other Users' Opinions
Recommendations
The role of smartphone-based social media capabilities in building social capital, trust, and credibility to engage consumers in eWOM: a social presence theory perspective
Smartphone-based social media has established itself a key platform for users to cultivate intimate social connections and exchange brand-related information, regardless of time or location, such as eWOM. However, understanding the essential elements of ...
Uses and gratifications of social networking sites for bridging and bonding social capital
Applying uses and gratifications theory (UGT) and social capital theory, our study examined users of four social networking sites (SNSs) (Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat), and their influence on online bridging and bonding social capital. ...
Empowering Storytellers with Social Media
TVX '15: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Interactive Experiences for TV and Online VideoFrom entertainment to news to corporate marketing, social media has infused, informed and revolutionized the way creators are reaching their audience.
In this discussion we will explore the core impact of social media as a storytelling medium, how ...
Comments