518390

research-article2014
NMS0010.1177/1461444813518390New Media & SocietyYamamoto et al.

Article

new media & society

Social media and mobiles as

2015, Vol. 17(6) 880­–898
© The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
political mobilization forces sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1461444813518390
for young adults: Examining nms.sagepub.com

the moderating role of online

political expression in political
participation

Masahiro Yamamoto
University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, USA

Matthew J Kushin
Shepherd University, USA

Francis Dalisay
University of Hawaii-Manoa, USA

Abstract
A web survey of college students was conducted to examine whether online political
expression moderates the effects of political media use on political participation.
Results showed that online political expression enhanced the effects of political mobile
apps, traditional offline and online media, and social media on political participation.
Implications are discussed for a mobilizing role of online media in the democratic
process for young adults.

Keywords
Mobile apps, online political expression, political participation, social media

Corresponding author:
Masahiro Yamamoto, Department of Communication Studies, University of Wisconsin-La Crosse, 1725
State Street, Wing 202, La Crosse, WI 54601, USA.
Email: myamamoto@uwlax.edu
Yamamoto et al. 881

The use of social media and mobile web applications has grown in recent elections, par-
ticularly among young adults (Rainie et al., 2012; Smith and Duggan, 2012a, 2012b). Of
significance for this age group is the rise in the use of social media and mobile devices
for obtaining political information, creating user-generated political content, and express-
ing political views and opinions. Surveys by the Pew Internet & American Life Project
indicate the increasing popularity of social media use, led by users aged 18–29, for politi-
cal activities such as posting views regarding political and social issues, sharing news
articles, following political figures, and watching political videos (Rainie et al., 2012).
In response to the growing political use of social media and mobile devices, recent
research has examined whether these media affect young adults’ political behaviors (e.g.,
Baumgartner and Morris, 2010; Campbell and Kwak, 2010; Vitak et al., 2011).
While evidence for social media use for political information consumption is some-
what mixed, for the most part, research supports the role of mobile web applications and
online political expression in fostering political participation (e.g., Campbell and Kwak,
2010; Gil de Zúñiga et al., 2009, 2010). Yet theoretical attention in these lines of work
has focused largely on the main effects of these newer communication activities on polit-
ical participation among the general public. Few studies have explored whether citizens,
particularly young adults, may become more politically engaged through actively seek-
ing out news while also frequently expressing opinions online. To address this gap, the
present study, an extension of the differential gains model (Scheufele, 2002), examines
the role of online political expression in moderating the relationship between political
information consumption and offline political participation for young adults.
To assess this plausibility, we analyze data from a web survey of college students
conducted shortly before the 2012 US presidential election. We study young adults
because political social media use is greatest among persons aged 18–29 (Rainie et al.,
2012). Greater understanding of the impact of online political expression on young
adults’ political behaviors may have important democratic implications, as concerns over
political disengagement have long focused on this age group (CIRCLE, 2013). A pro-
longed lack of engagement hampers young adults’ representation in the democratic pro-
cess, which may ultimately undermine the efficacy of the American democratic system.
The present study extends the literature on the differential gains model by, firstly,
examining online political expression as a moderator of the relationship between media
use and political participation. Secondly, this study examines a wide variety of commu-
nicative activities that are common among young adults (Rainie et al., 2012) and that are
considered part of online expression. Finally, we investigate the use of social media and
mobile devices as unique sources of political information. Given that new technologies
have facilitated alternative forms of opinion expression and information consumption,
more research is needed into the ways in which these technologies promote young adults’
political participation. The study’s overall goal is to advance our understanding of how
political expression enabled by social media contributes to the democratic process.

The differential gains model

Going beyond the main effects of individual communication variables on political par-
ticipation, the differential gains model theorizes joint effects of political communication
882 new media & society 17(6)

activities in explaining why certain citizens are more actively engaged in politics than
others. The model originally focused on the role of interpersonal political discussion in
enhancing the effects of news media use on political behaviors, such that citizens who
use media sources for hard news are more politically engaged if they also discuss politics
with others frequently (Scheufele, 2002).
The model is based on two theoretical assumptions. Firstly, political discussion
helps increase meaningful political learning. Applying what is learned from news
sources to interpersonal communicative contexts enables citizens to think about cur-
rent events, relate personal experiences to politics, address uncertainty, learn differ-
ent perspectives, reconsider issue stances, and foster political engagement (Kim and
Kim, 2008; Scheufele, 2002). Secondly, political discussion, based on a uses-and-
gratifications perspective, helps foster the motivation to comprehend political infor-
mation. Those who frequently talk with others about politics tend to anticipate future
discussions and disagreements, which induces careful processing of news in order to
clearly express opinions and present logical arguments on issues (Scheufele, 2002).
Such active media use allows individuals to extract useful information for political
action.
Bringing the differential gains model to the Internet, research shows that Internet use
interacts with political information use to promote political participation (Hardy and
Scheufele, 2005; Nisbet and Scheufele, 2004). For example, Hardy and Scheufele (2005)
found that the relationship between Internet hard news use and offline political participa-
tion was stronger for respondents who more frequently engaged in political chat online.
Yet a few extensions are warranted, and we identify three.
Firstly, Hardy and Scheufele’s (2005) work measured online hard news use in terms
of attention and exposure to local, national, and international news. This measure, how-
ever, does not precisely capture today’s online news content characterized by nonlinear,
multimedia, and user-generated information, such as blogs, social network sites, and
video streaming sites, as well as growing mobile applications. These media arguably
allow for more detailed reporting of alternative events, ideas, and perspectives that con-
sumers may not easily find in traditional news stories (e.g., Carpenter, 2010; Fico et al.,
2013; Meraz, 2009; Wall, 2005). In fact, an assumption of the differential gains model is
that the interaction between political information consumption and political discussion is
impacted by the attributes of media content such as detail-oriented, in-depth coverage or
how easy it is to process news content (Scheufele, 2002). Thus, it is important to examine
how the utility of user-generated, participatory information sources may be enhanced by
online political expression.
Secondly, the types of online expression that have been examined in past research
have been limited in scope. While Hardy and Scheufele (2005) reported a moderating
role of online political chat, they acknowledged that chatting online about politics is only
one aspect of online political expression. Thus, although prior research has shown that
this form of online discussion is important, novel forms of political expression enabled
by social media have not been studied satisfactorily. The present study explores the rich
multimedia interactivity that characterizes today’s social web, in which users are both
content consumers and creators (Bruns, 2006). Moving beyond a traditional form of
political chat and discussion, social media avenues offer users opportunities to express
Yamamoto et al. 883

political ideas through text, graphics, and video by writing a blog post, posting opinions,
and sharing news stories or multimedia content.
Lastly, prior research on the differential gains model has focused on the general pub-
lic, while its application to young adults has not been studied. Combined with the relative
political disengagement of the young and the popularity of social media among young
adults, the present study examines whether online political expression strengthens the
utility of political information consumption (i.e., traditional offline and online media,
social media, and mobile apps) in relation to their political participation.

Political participation
As noted, the outcome variable in the differential gains model is political participation,
which refers to behavior that could affect government action – either directly by influ-
encing the public policies that are implemented, or indirectly by influencing the elections
of political actors creating those policies (Verba et al., 1995). This has traditionally
included activities such as voting, circulating a petition for an issue, working for a politi-
cal campaign, contacting elected officials or news outlets, attending town hall meetings,
and making political donations (Verba et al., 1995). Some scholars have distinguished
between institutional and deliberative, or expressive, forms of political participation
(e.g., McLeod et al., 1999). Institutional participation is conceived of as action aimed at
institutions in an effort to affect government action. Deliberative participation occurs
when citizens engage in politics through the expression or discussion of political topics.
To be consistent with prior research on the differential gains model (e.g., Hardy and
Scheufele, 2005; Scheufele, 2002), the present study focuses on offline institutional
political participation, rather than offline deliberative participation, as a criterion
variable.

Types of political media use and online political expression

Traditional offline and online media.  The dynamic growth of the Internet is continuously
changing the news landscape. Common online news sources include online editions of
traditional news media and portal websites, such as Yahoo (Pew Research Center for the
People & the Press, 2012). Although use of these sources for campaign news has risen
sharply among young adults, traditional offline media still play a role as a news source.
For example, when the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press (2012) asked
American adults younger than age 30 what particular medium they used to get news
“yesterday,” 34% reported they used television, which was close to the 39% of those
who reported obtaining news on a social media site, but far from the 13% who reported
using print newspapers.

Social media.  Social media sites, such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and blogs, have
enabled new opportunities for interactive, user-centered political experiences. While
research has focused mainly on the mainstream social media sites noted above (e.g.,
Baumgartner and Morris, 2010; Hanson et al., 2010), there are other platforms such as
photo-sharing sites (e.g., Pinterest) and social news sites (e.g., Reddit).
884 new media & society 17(6)

Political communication activities on these sites have become common in recent elec-
tions. User-generated political content can serve as a source of political information.
Users can learn about politics by consuming such content as blog commentaries, user
comments, and video, audio, and photos uploaded by others. Such user-generated “raw”
political content and opinions provided by ordinary citizens often contain information
and perspectives that may not be available elsewhere (e.g., Carpenter, 2010; Meraz,
2009; Wall, 2005). Social media also allow users to obtain a stream of customized politi-
cal information from their online contacts. Citizens increasingly use social media to fol-
low elected officials and candidates and acquire political information (Pew Research
Center for the People & the Press, 2012; Pew Research Journalism Project, 2012).

Mobile apps.  Mobile devices such as smartphones offer unique political opportunities
due to their accessibility and convenience. A recent report shows that 88% of registered
voters own a cell phone, 48% of whom own a smartphone (Smith and Duggan, 2012b).
Of these smartphone users, 45% used their device to read other people’s comments on a
social networking site about a candidate or campaign and 35% fact-checked information
about a candidate or the election (Smith and Duggan, 2012b).
In response to the growing popularity of smartphone devices, political campaigns
increasingly integrate mobile applications (“apps”) into their campaign tactics. During
the 2012 election campaign, Barak Obama and Mitt Romney set up mobile apps, Obama
for America and Mitt’s VP. These apps enabled supporters to find campaign events near
their locations, organize door-to-door campaigning, and make campaign donations.
Major news outlets have mobile apps that provide users with personalized news and
news alerts “on-the-go.” A recent report indicates that 45% of voters with smartphones
use mobile apps and that 8% of smartphone owners use apps from a candidate, political
party, or interest group to acquire information about public affairs (Smith and Duggan,
2012b).

Online political expression.  Research shows that political social media use is multidimen-
sional, consisting of cognitive (i.e., information seeking) and behavioral (i.e., expres-
sive) dimensions (e.g., Kushin and Yamamoto, 2010). Gil de Zúñiga et al. (2013) noted
that online expressive behaviors occur through forms of real-time, interactive media
such as blogs and social network sites. Such media allow for the sharing of, and com-
menting on, ideas, which are comparable to the real-time nature of offline expression,
such as interpersonal political talks.
Online political expression is especially popular among young adults. They tend to
use blogs, microblogs, social network sites, and content-sharing sites to express their
political opinions, such as posting status updates to their profile, uploading video and
photos to express support for a candidate, sharing news articles, and discussing politics
with other users (Rainie et al., 2012; Smith and Duggan, 2012a). For example, a
nationwide survey conducted in 2012 by the Pew Internet & American Life Project
indicated that 42% of 18–29 young adult users of social network sites or Twitter posted
thoughts or comments on political and social issues, compared to older users (34% of
30–49 users, 28% of 50–64 users, and 20% of 65 or older users). Also, these young
adult users led other forms of online political expression, with 44% of them having
Yamamoto et al. 885

liked or promoted political material and 33% having posted links to political stories
(Rainie et al., 2012).
It should be noted that online expressive activities are uniquely different from con-
ventional offline political expression. Offline expression typically refers to behaviors
such as speaking out about issues in community meetings (Dalisay et al., 2012) and
expressing opinions in the presence of strangers (Noelle-Neumann, 1974). To express
political views in these offline settings may require greater adherence to the norm of
politeness (Papacharissi, 2004) and may encourage more self-censoring (Hayes et al.,
2006). In contrast, a stronger sense of anonymity afforded by the Internet may put indi-
viduals at ease in expressing opinions online. Thus, individuals may not be monitoring
their communicated messages as much as they would in offline settings.

Previous research.  Existing literature on the political role of the Internet shows that online
political expression has independent positive effects on political participation (e.g., Jung
et al., 2011; Vitak et al., 2011). For example, Jung et al. (2011) showed that online politi-
cal messaging, such as posting blog posts and comments about current issues and public
affairs, is positively related to offline political participation.
While evidence for the role of political information seeking indicates that traditional
offline and online media use is positively tied to offline political participation and likeli-
hood of voting (e.g., Baumgartner and Morris, 2010; Gil de Zúñiga et al., 2009; Kaufhold
et al., 2010), the effects of social media use for political information are somewhat
mixed. Gil de Zúñiga et al. (2012) found that social network site use for news had posi-
tive effects on offline participation. In contrast, Baumgartner and Morris (2010) found
that while using YouTube and social network sites for news was linked to online partici-
pation, its effects on offline participation and likelihood of voting were not significant.
A few studies have investigated the role of mobile use in participatory behaviors.
Campbell and Kwak (2010) showed a positive link between mobile phone use and civic
and political participation. Rojas and Puig-i-Abril (2009) found that cell phone informa-
tion use was related to online expression, which led to a greater tendency to seek to
mobilize others using a cell phone, which in turn was related to offline civic participa-
tion. Neither study, however, investigated an interactive association between online
political expression and mobile use in affecting political participation. They were also
limited in their mobile use measures. Campbell and Kwak’s (2010) measure of mobile
phone use for information exchange did not parse information seeking and expressive
dimensions; also, some items used to measure mobile phone use were not mobile-spe-
cific activities (e.g., “go online to express my opinions about issues”). Moreover, Rojas
and Puig-i-Abril’s (2009) measure of cell phone use was limited to a dichotomous item
asking respondents whether they used their phones to access news and information.

Complementary role of online expression: Extending the differential

gains model
On balance, political communication scholars have focused mainly on the independ-
ent and main effects of online political expression and political information seeking
886 new media & society 17(6)

via traditional media, social media, and mobiles on political participation. Theoretical
refinement is needed to better understand how political communication activities
enabled by web interactivity contribute to the democratic process. Given the evi-
dence that online expression is more strongly connected with key cognitive, attitudi-
nal, and behavioral outcomes than information consumption on social media (e.g.,
Kushin and Yamamoto, 2010), the present study assesses why, and in what ways,
online expression is particularly important for motivating young adults politically.
As the walls between consumers and producers of content have broken down (Bruns,
2006), young adults may become more politically active when they engage with
what they have read, viewed, or heard from political information sources via online
expression.
This expectation stems from the differential gains model (Scheufele, 2002), which
explains why online political expression moderates the association between political
information seeking and political participation. Firstly, expressing opinions online about
what one has learned from news sources, such as sharing political news, posting com-
ments on social network sites, and sharing political videos on social media, would facili-
tate casual political discussions, fact-checking, exposure to different perspectives, and
learning new information. Secondly, those who frequently engage in online political
expression would be more motivated to actively seek out and understand political infor-
mation, as they anticipate using it for future expressive activities. Research has reported
that sharing knowledge and helping others are important reasons why people use social
media (Rainie et al., 2012).
In sum, the present study extends research on the differential gains model by consid-
ering a greater diversity of information sources and novel opinion expression opportuni-
ties available on social media. Based on the above theoretical discussion, the following
hypotheses are formulated:

H1: The relationship between attention to traditional offline media for political infor-
mation and offline political participation will be moderated by online expression,
such that the strength of the relationship is greater for those who engage in online
expression more frequently.
H2: The relationship between attention to traditional online media for political infor-
mation and offline political participation will be moderated by online expression,
such that the strength of the relationship is greater for those who engage in online
expression more frequently.
H3: The relationship between attention to social media for political information and
offline political participation will be moderated by online expression, such that the
strength of the relationship is greater for those who engage in online expression more
frequently.
H4: The relationship between mobile app use for political information and offline
political participation will be moderated by online expression, such that the strength
of the relationship is greater for those who engage in online expression more
frequently.
Yamamoto et al. 887

Method
Data came from a web survey of college students at a public university in the Midwest
during the three-week period prior to the November 6, 2012 election. Every student
enrolled at the university had a university-assigned email address. A random probability-
based sample of the student body was obtained from the university registrar. A total of
839 students responded to the survey for a response rate of 16.8%. Of those who
responded, 239 cases were removed due to the failure to complete a large majority of the
survey. The final sample was 600 respondents who completed nearly the entire survey,
with the final minimum response rate of 12.0%. Although admittedly low, this response
rate is common for web surveys (Shih and Fan, 2008). Based on our focus on young
adults, 49 respondents who did not report their age or were above the age of 29 were
removed from the analysis.

Measures
Attention to social media.  Building on prior research (Kushin and Yamamoto, 2010), sev-
eral social media sites were included capturing a variety of platforms where political
information can be acquired, including personal blogs, video-sharing websites (e.g.,
YouTube), photo-sharing websites (e.g., Pinterest), social news websites (e.g., Reddit),
Twitter, social network sites (e.g., Facebook), and online forums and discussion boards.
Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = no attention; 7 = a lot
of attention), how much attention they paid to each of the platforms to learn about the
election.
Political uses of social media sites may overlap due to cross-platform updates such as
Twitter integration enhancements with Facebook. To examine the dimensionality of
these items, principal component analysis with promax rotation method was performed.
Results produced two factor solutions. One component, which explained 43.10% of the
variance, consisted of attention to content-sharing/social network sites (M = 11.04, SD =
5.95, α = .77): video-sharing sites (M = 2.97, SD = 1.94), photo-sharing sites (M = 2.08,
SD = 1.66), Twitter (M = 2.29, SD = 1.95), and social network sites (M = 3.73, SD =
2.16). The other component, which explained 17.88% of the variance, comprised atten-
tion to blogs/social news/forums (M = 5.73, SD = 3.41, α = .65, inter-item correlation =
.40): personal blogs (M = 1.55, SD = 1.16); social news sites (M = 2.20, SD = 1.77); and
online forums and discussion boards (M = 1.97, SD = 1.46). No signs of cross-loading
were detected.

Mobile app use.  Four items were constructed to measure smartphone app use for political
information. Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = none; 7 =
very often), how often they engaged in each of the following: using a news media outlet’s
smartphone app to learn about the election; using a candidate’s smartphone app to stay
up to date with the election such as Obama for America and Mitt’s VP; using a smart-
phone app that supports a particular political party, ideology, or cause (e.g., conservative,
liberal); and receiving alerts on a smartphone about election-related news or events.
These items were summed to construct an additive index (M = 5.52, SD = 3.49, α = .79).
888 new media & society 17(6)

Note that these items focus on information seeking uniquely enabled by mobile devices
not accessible with traditional computer devices.

Attention to traditional online media.  Four items were used to measure attention to tradi-
tional online media. Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = no
attention; 7 = a lot of attention), how much attention they paid to television websites,
online newspapers, radio websites, and news portal sites (e.g., Yahoo News). These items
were formed to construct an additive index (M = 12.44, SD = 5.55, α = .74).

Attention to traditional offline media.  Five items measured attention to traditional offline
media. Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Likert-type scale (1 = no attention; 7
= a lot of attention), how much attention they paid to network television, cable televi-
sion, print newspapers, radio, and magazines to learn about the election. These items
were summed to form an additive index (M = 15.66, SD = 6.35, α = .75).

Online political expression.  Five items were used to measure online political expression
(e.g., Kushin and Yamamoto, 2010). Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Likert-
type scale (1 = none; 7 = very often), how often they engaged in each of the following:
writing blog posts on the election, candidates, and political issues; writing posts on
online social networks about the election, candidates, and political issues (e.g., Face-
book, Twitter, Google+, etc.); sharing political news, video clips, photos, computer art-
work, or others’ blog posts online; creating and posting online audio, video, animation,
photos or computer artwork to express political views; and exchanging opinions about
the election, candidates, and political issues online (e.g., blogs, Facebook, Twitter,
Google+, etc.). These items were summed to create an additive index (M = 8.24, SD =
5.05, α = .84).

Offline political participation.  Seven items were used to measure offline political participa-
tion (e.g., Hardy and Scheufele, 2005). Respondents were asked, on a seven-point Lik-
ert-type scale (1 = none; 7 = very often), how often they engaged in each of the following
activities offline: attending a meeting related to politics; writing a letter to a newspaper
editor or calling into a public affairs radio talk show; circulating a petition for a candidate
or issue; working for a political campaign; contacting a public official; calling other
people to raise funds for a political organization; and contributing money to a political
organization or candidate. These items were combined to form an additive index (M =
9.15, SD = 4.35, α = .83).

Control variables.  To counteract misspecification errors, several additional variables were

used as controls. Age was measured in an open-ended format (M = 20.13, SD = 1.78).
Sex was measured with females as the high value (M = .76, SD = .43). Race was meas-
ured with Caucasians as the high value and all other groups as the low value (M = .91,
SD = .28). Political ideology was measured by a single item (1 = very conservative; 5 =
very liberal) (M = 3.22, SD = .94). Political interest was measured by asking respondents
how interested they were in politics (1 = not interested; 7 = absolutely interested) (M =
3.63, SD = 1.77).
Yamamoto et al. 889

Internal political efficacy was measured based on the work of Niemi et al. (1991).
Respondents were asked to indicate, on a seven-point Likert-type scale, whether they
agreed or disagreed with four statements (e.g., “I consider myself to be well-qualified to
participate in politics”). The four internal political efficacy items were summed to form
an additive scale (M = 16.24, SD = 5.46, α = .83). External political efficacy was meas-
ured based on the work of Gastil and Xenos (2010). Respondents were asked to indicate,
on a seven-point Likert-type scale, whether they agreed or disagreed with three state-
ments (e.g., “People like me don’t have any say about what the government does” –
reversed-coded). The three external political efficacy items were combined into an
additive scale (M = 12.45, SD = 3.15, α = .59, inter-item correlations = .32).

Statistical analysis.  An ordinary least squares (OLS) regression equation was estimated.
To test the hypothesized interaction effects, it is necessary to create product terms
between main effect variables. To reduce potential multicollinearity problems, the six
main effect variables were first standardized before computing interaction terms (Cohen
et al., 2003). In the regression model, control variables were entered first, followed by
the six standardized main effect variables in the second block and the interaction terms
in the third block. Before-entry betas were used to test interactive effects controlling only
for variables in prior blocks, but not in the same and/or subsequent blocks (Hardy and
Scheufele, 2005). Also, simple slope tests were conducted employing the SPSS PRO-
CESS macro (Hayes, 2013). Based on the pick-a-point method, conditional effects at
plus and minus one standard deviation around the mean of online expression were esti-
mated, with the main effect variables mean-centered prior to analysis and confidence
intervals generated at the 95% level. When this would produce a value outside of the
possible range of the data, the lowest possible value was used instead.

Results
H1 stated that the strength of the relationship between attention to traditional offline
media use for political information and offline political participation would be greater
for those who engage in online expression more frequently. This hypothesis was sup-
ported, as shown by the significant interaction effect (β = .14) (see Table 1). Based on its
non-significant main effect, traditional offline media had a positive effect on offline
political participation only when respondents went online to express political views more
often (see Figure 1). Simple slope tests also indicated that this effect was significant
when levels of online expression were high (point estimate = .113, 95% CI: .016 to .210),
but not low to moderate (point estimates = −.042 and .018, 95% CIs: −.127 to .042 and
−.057 to .093, respectively).
H2 stated that the strength of the relationship between attention to traditional online
media use for political information and offline political participation would be greater
for those who engage in online expression more frequently. This hypothesis was sup-
ported, as evidenced by the significant interaction effect (β = .20) (see Table 1). Combined
with its non-significant main effect, traditional online media had a positive effect on
offline political participation only when respondents expressed political opinions online
more often (see Figure 2). Simple slope tests also showed that this effect was significant
890 new media & society 17(6)

Table 1.  Predicting interactive effects on offline political participation.

Offline political participation

Age −.03
Sex (female) .01
Race (Caucasian) −.16***
Political ideology .06
Political interest .07
Internal political efficacy .12*
External political efficacy .11**
R2 (%) 26.4***
Sharing/networking −.10*
Blogs/social new/forums .11*
Mobile apps .22***
Traditional online media .01
Traditional offline media .03
Online expression .25***
Incremental R2 (%) 14.0***
Online expression × sharing/networking .14**
Online expression × blogs/social news/forums .15**
Online expression × mobile app use .20***
Online expression × traditional online media .20***
Online expression × traditional offline media .14**
Incremental R2 (%) 3.5***
Total R2 (%) 43.9***

Note. N = 480. Entries are standardized regression coefficients. Entries in the third block are before-entry
betas controlling only for variables in the prior blocks. Block R2 for the third block indicates the block
contribution if all interaction terms were entered simultaneously.
*** p < .001. ** p < .01. * p < .05.

when levels of online expression were high (point estimate = .161, 95% CI: .042 to .280),
but not low to moderate (point estimates = −.066 and .022, 95% CIs: −.166 to .035 and
−.072 to .115, respectively).
H3 stated that the strength of the relationship between attention to social media and
offline political participation would be greater for those who engage in online expression
more frequently. This hypothesis was partially supported. As shown in Table 1, the interac-
tion term between attention to blogs/social news/forums and online expression was related
to offline political participation (β = .15), suggesting that the positive main effect of atten-
tion to blogs/social news/forums became stronger as respondents expressed their political
views online more often (see Figure 3). Simple slope tests also revealed that this link was
not significant when levels of online expression were low to moderate (point estimates =
−.002 and .083, 95% CIs: −.145 to .141 and −.037 to .204, respectively), but was signifi-
cant at high levels of online expression (point estimate = .219, 95% CI: .098 to .339).
The interaction term between attention to content-sharing/social network sites for
political information and online expression was associated with offline political
Yamamoto et al. 891

Figure 1.  Interactive relationships between traditional offline media and online political
expression.

participation (β = .14) (see Table 1). This interactive relationship suggests that the
negative main effect of attention to content-sharing/social network sites (β = −.10)
became stronger if respondents engaged in online expression more often (see Figure
4). Simple slope tests showed that this effect was significant when levels of online
expression were low (point estimate = −.121, 95% CI: −.192 to −.051), but not moder-
ate to high (point estimates = −.055 and .050, 95% CIs: −.120 to .009 and −.047 to
.147), implying that the negative effect of attention to content-sharing/social network
sites on offline political participation was pronounced for those who engaged in online
expression infrequently. However, this effect was reduced to non-significance as
respondents expressed political views online more frequently.
H4 stated that the strength of the relationship between mobile app use for political
information and offline political participation would be greater for those who engage
in online expression more frequently. This hypothesis was supported, as evidenced by
the significant interaction effect (β = .20) (see Table 1). That is, the effect of mobile
app use was amplified as respondents politically expressed themselves online more
often (see Figure 5). Simple slope tests showed that this effect was significant when
levels of online expression were high (point estimate = .250, 95% CI: .142 to .359), but
not low to moderate (point estimates = .041 and .122, 95% CIs: −.124 to .206 and
−.015 to .258).

Summary and discussion

The current study extends research on the role of social media in young adults’ political
participation by assessing potential interactive mechanisms by which online political
892 new media & society 17(6)

Figure 2.  Interactive relationships between traditional online media and online political
expression.

expression enhances the effects of news media use. This study contributes to the theory
and literature in a number of ways. Firstly, on balance, the evidence presented above
shows that young adults who consume political information online are more likely to
participate in politics offline, as they express political opinions online more often.
Specifically, online political expression was found to have a mobilizing effect on offline
political participation for those who use blogs/social news/forums and mobile apps, with
those who used these tools to obtain political information more likely to participate in
politics offline, as they also frequently expressed political views online.
In contrast, the positive interactive effects that online political expression had with
traditional online and offline media, coupled with their non-significant main effects on
offline political participation, indicate that these information sources become politically
meaningful when young adults express political opinions online frequently based on
what they learn from these traditional media sources.
Two mechanisms help explain the observed moderating role of online political expres-
sion. Firstly, engaging with political information through expressive communicative
activities online helps users effectively think about political issues and candidates, relate
to politics, eliminate uncertainty, and form or reconsider issue stances (Kim and Kim,
2008). Secondly, frequent online expression of political opinions helps individuals effec-
tively extract information important for political participation, as those who express
political views online frequently tend to anticipate using political information, such as
using news to write blog posts, sharing news stories with their networks, and exchanging
opinions in online discussion forums, and therefore pay close attention to information
sources. As explained earlier in this paper, the present results, theoretically informed by
the differential gains model (Scheufele, 2002), extend prior research (Hardy and
Yamamoto et al. 893

Figure 3.  Interactive relationships between blogs/social news/forums and online political
expression.

Scheufele, 2005; Nisbet and Scheufele, 2004; Scheufele, 2002), with a consideration of
greater expressive activities enabled by the rich, multimedia interactivity available
through social media as well as political information consumption via social media and
mobile web applications.
It is important to note that online political expression interacted with content-sharing/
social network sites in a way that those who engaged in online expression infrequently
while paying attention to political information from content-sharing/social network sites
were less likely to participate in politics offline, implying that for young adults, these
sites perhaps function best as locations of interaction and are not effective in fostering
political action.
Still, these findings suggest overall positive support for the political utility of social
media. The findings counter prior research suggesting that social media use does not
extend to offline participation (e.g., Baumgartner and Morris, 2010; Zhang et al., 2010).
With a nuanced examination of social media that considered both cognitive and behav-
ioral aspects, the present study supports the notion that online political expression plays
a role in bringing citizens and young adults alike into politics (e.g., Jung et al., 2011;
Kushin and Yamamoto, 2010).
Another important finding is that mobile app use for political information had inde-
pendent effects on offline political participation, which is consistent with prior research
(Campbell and Kwak, 2010; Rojas and Puig-i-Abril, 2009). This finding seems encour-
aging for the democratic process, given a recent trend of using tailored mobile apps for
news distribution and political campaigns. Mobile apps enable users to efficiently get
the latest news as well as monitor online conversations and trends by, for instance,
viewing Tweets about ongoing events and issues posted by news media, campaigns,
894 new media & society 17(6)

Figure 4.  Interactive relationships between content-sharing/social network sites and online
political expression.

fact-checkers, partisans, and ordinary users. Also, mobile apps provide mobilizing
information that can facilitate political action such as when and where campaign events
are held (Lemert, 1981). These characteristics collectively make mobile apps an effec-
tive source of information that facilitates political action.
Despite these theoretically suggestive results, several limitations hamper definitive
conclusions. Firstly, the findings were based on a sample of college students attending a
public university in the Midwest and thus cannot be generalizable to the larger young
adult population. The present sample is clearly on the younger end of this population and
over-represents females and Caucasians compared to population-based sex and race
compositions for those aged 20–29 (Howden and Meyer, 2011; U.S. Department of
Commerce, 2012). College students also diverge from people in this age group without
a college education in several respects. While there is no significant difference in politi-
cal blog use and political use of Facebook, college students tend to participate in online
political discussions more frequently, be more politically knowledgeable, and be more
politically and civically active than young adults without a college education (Portney
and O’Leary, 2007). Moreover, the institution where the sample was collected is in one
of the swing states in the 2012 presidential election. Taken together, it is possible that the
results are unique to the present sample. To increase the confidence in the current find-
ings, future work must replicate the current study with a probability-based sample that
represents the young adult population.
Secondly, the cross-sectional nature of the survey data precludes more nuanced inves-
tigation of the differential gains model. To qualify the theoretical explanations for the
observed findings, it is important to assess which of the two mechanisms help young
adults extract political information leading to political action – the actual occurrence or
anticipation of opinion expression online, or both. It might be helpful to employ an
Yamamoto et al. 895

Figure 5.  Interactive relationships between mobile apps and online political expression.

experimental design where one group of the subjects is asked to engage in expressive
activities on politics online and then read a news story, while the other group, to induce
the motivation to carefully process information, is led to believe that they will be
instructed to engage in expressive activities based on a news story they read. This type
of design, with measurement of intentions to participate in politics and/or actual political
participation, might allow future studies to dissect the moderating role of online political
expression.
Relatedly, the interpretation of the current results is informed by the differential gains
model that focuses on the role of online expression as a moderator of the relationship
between news media use and participation. However, an alternative interpretation is
equally plausible. That is, news media use may moderate associations between online
expression and political participation, such that those who express opinions online par-
ticipate more as they more actively seek political information. Designs such as the one
suggested in the previous paragraph might be of help to clarify underlying moderation
mechanisms.
Thirdly, offline political discussion was not examined in this analysis, which has been
shown to moderate the relationship between traditional news media use and offline polit-
ical participation (Scheufele, 2002). As an extension, offline political discussion would
be expected to strengthen the effects of political information seeking via social media
and mobiles on offline political participation. Fourthly, studies conducted in an election
context need to assess voting or voting intentions, as voting is considered an end result
in an election. Finally, this study did not examine levels of comfort or competence with
mobile telephony, a known moderator on the effects of mobiles on political participation
(Campbell and Kwak, 2010).
Considering these limitations, this study has extended the role of online political
expression in the democratic process. Why young adults differentially engage in politics
896 new media & society 17(6)

is in part because expressing political opinions through social media improves the utility
of political information seeking. It not only amplifies the positive effects of political
information sources on political participation, but also makes information sources with
little importance become effective platforms for citizenship. Online expression has
become an important element of political communication activities in recent elections,
bringing politics closer to young adult citizens. Although further investigation is needed
to understand why and how individuals communicate their political opinions online,
expressive activities on social media seem to be effective in encouraging young adults’
political participation.

Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or
not-for-profit sectors.

References
Baumgartner JC and Morris JS (2010) MyFaceTube politics: social networking web sites and
political engagement of young adults. Social Science Computer Review 28(1): 24–44.
Bruns A (2006) Towards produsage: futures for user-led content production. In: Sudweeks F,
Hrachovec H and Ess C (eds) Proceedings: Cultural Attitudes towards Communication and
Technology. Perth, WA, Australia: Murdoch University, pp. 275–284.
Campbell SW and Kwak N (2010) Mobile communication and civic life: linking patterns of use to
civic and political engagement. Journal of Communication 60(3): 536–555.
Carpenter S (2010) A study of content diversity in online citizen journalism and online newspaper
articles. New Media & Society 12(7): 1064–1084.
CIRCLE (2013) Youth voting. The Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and
Engagement. Available at: http://www.civicyouth.org/quick-facts/youth-voting/
Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, et al. (2003) Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the
Behavioral Sciences. 3rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dalisay F, Hmielowski JD, Kushin MJ, et al. (2012) Social capital and the spiral of silence.
International Journal of Public Opinion Research 24(3): 325–345.
Fico F, Lacy S, Wildman SS, et al. (2013) Citizen journalism sites as information substitutes and
complements for United States newspaper coverage of local governments. Digital Journalism
1(1): 152–168.
Gastil J and Xenos M (2010) Of attitudes and engagement: clarifying the reciprocal relation-
ship between civic attitudes and political participation. Journal of Communication 60(2):
318–343.
Gil de Zúñiga H, Bachmann I, Hsu SH, et al. (2013) Expressive versus consumptive blog use:
implications for interpersonal discussion and political participation. International Journal of
Communication 7: 1538–1559.
Gil de Zúñiga H, Jung N and Valenzuela S (2012) Social media use for news and individuals’
social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 17(3): 319–336.
Gil de Zúñiga H, Puig-i-Abril E and Rojas H (2009) Weblogs, traditional sources online and politi-
cal participation: an assessment of how the Internet is changing the political environment.
New Media & Society 11(4): 553–574.
Gil de Zúñiga H, Veenstra A, Vraga E, et al. (2010) Digital democracy: reimagining pathways to
political participation. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 7(1): 36–51.
Yamamoto et al. 897

Hanson G, Haridakis PM, Cunningham AW, et al. (2010) The 2008 presidential campaign:
political cynicism in the age of Facebook, Myspace, and YouTube. Mass Communication &
Society 13(5): 584–607.
Hardy BW and Scheufele DA (2005) Examining differential gains from Internet use: compar-
ing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication 55(1):
71–84.
Hayes AF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A
Regression-Based Approach. New York: Guilford Press.
Hayes AF, Scheufele DA and Huge ME (2006) Nonparticipation as self-censorship: publicly
observable political activity in a polarized opinion climate. Political Behavior 28(3):
259–283.
Howden LM and Meyer JA (2011) Age and sex composition: 2010. Available at: http://www.
census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-03.pdf
Jung N, Kim Y and Gil de Zúñiga H (2011) The mediating role of knowledge and efficacy in the
effects of communication on political participation. Mass Communication & Society 14(4):
407–430.
Kaufhold K, Valenzuela S and Gil de Zúñiga H (2010) Citizen journalism and democracy: how
user-generated news use relates to political knowledge and participation. Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 87(3–4): 515–529.
Kim J and Kim EJ (2008) Theorizing dialogic deliberation: everyday political talk as communica-
tive action and dialogue. Communication Theory 18(1): 51–70.
Kushin MJ and Yamamoto M (2010) Did social media really matter? College students’ use of
online media and political decision making in the 2008 election. Mass Communication &
Society 13(5): 608–630.
Lemert JB (1981) Does Mass Communication Change Public Opinion after All? A New Approach
to Effects Analysis. Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
McLeod JM, Scheufele DA and 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.
Meraz S (2009) Is there an elite hold? Traditional media to social media agenda setting influence
in blog networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14(3): 682–707.
Niemi RG, Craig SC and Mattei F (1991) Measuring internal political efficacy in the 1988 National
Election Study. American Political Science Review 85(4): 1407–1413.
Nisbet MC and Scheufele DA (2004) Political talk as a catalyst for online citizenship. Journalism
& Mass Communication Quarterly 81(4): 877–896.
Noelle-Neumann E (1974) The spiral of silence: a theory of public opinion. Journal of
Communication 24(2): 43–51.
Papacharissi Z (2004) Democracy online: civility, politeness, and the democratic potential of
online political discussion. New Media & Society 6(2): 259–283.
Pew Research Center for the People & the Press (2012) In changing news landscape, even televi-
sion is vulnerable. Available at: http://www.people-press.org/2012/09/27/in-changing-news-
landscape-even-television-is-vulnerable/
Pew Research Journalism Project (2012) Internet gains most as campaign news source but cable
TV still leads. Available at: http://www.journalism.org/2012/10/25/social-media-doubles-
remains-limited/
Portney KE and O’Leary L (2007) Civic and political engagement of America’s youth: a report
from the Tisch College “National Survey of Civic and Political Engagement of Young
People.” Available at: http://activecitizen.tufts.edu/downloads/FinalReport1.pdf
898 new media & society 17(6)

Rainie L, Smith A, Schlozman KL, et al. (2012) Social media and political engagement. Pew
Internet & American Life Project. Available at: http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/
Reports/2012/PIP_SocialMediaAndPoliticalEngagement_PDF.pdf
Rojas H and Puig-i-Abril E (2009) Mobilizers mobilized: information, expression, mobilization
and participation in the digital age. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 14(4):
902–927.
Scheufele DA (2002) Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for
participatory behavior. Communication Research 29(1): 46–65.
Shih T and Fan X (2008) Comparing response rates from web and mail surveys: a meta-analysis.
Field Methods 20(3): 249–271.
Smith A and Duggan M (2012a) Online political videos and campaign 2012. Pew Internet &
American Life Project. Available at: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Election-2012-
Video.aspx
Smith A and Duggan M (2012b) The state of the 2012 election – mobile politics. Pew Internet
& American Life Project. Available at: http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Election-2012-
Mobile.aspx
U.S. Department of Commerce (2012) Resident population by race, Hispanic origin, and age.
Available at: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0010.pdf
Verba S, Schlozman KL and Brady HE (1995) Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American
Politics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vitak J, Zube P, Smock A, et al. (2011) It’s complicated: Facebook users’ political participation
in the 2008 election. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 14(3): 107–114.
Wall M (2005) ‘Blogs of war’: weblogs as news. Journalism 6(2): 153–172.
Zhang W, Johnson TJ, Seltzer T, et al. (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.

Author biographies
Masahiro Yamamoto (PhD, Washington State University) is an Assistant Professor in the
Communication Studies Department at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. His research inter-
ests include mass media and community social organization, public health, and social media and
politics.
Matthew J Kushin (PhD, Washington State University) is an Assistant Professor in the Department
of Communication at Shepherd University. His research interests include political campaigns,
civic and political engagement, online media, and social media.
Francis Dalisay (PhD, Washington State University) is an Assistant Professor at the School of
Communications at the University of Hawaii-Manoa. His research interests include communica-
tion effects and processes in the Pacific Rim and international contexts.