CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,069Electoral Systems and Political ParticipationPolitical Theory and DemocracySocial Media and Politics

Cross-cutting Social Networks: Testing Democratic Theory in Practice

Open access
MUTZ, DIANA C.·2002·American Political Science Review
DOI 10.1017/s0003055402004264
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Exposure to conflicting political viewpoints is widely assumed to benefit the citizens of a democratic polity. Nonetheless, the benefits of exposure to heterogeneous political viewpoints have yet to be demonstrated empirically. Drawing on national survey data that tap characteristics of people's political discussion networks, I examine the impact of heterogeneous networks of political discussion on individuals' awareness of legitimate rationales for oppositional viewpoints, on their awareness of rationales for their own viewpoints, and on levels of political tolerance. Finally, utilizing a laboratory experiment manipulating exposure to dissonant and consonant political views, I further substantiate the causal role of cross-cutting exposure in fostering political tolerance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0003055402004264

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • How individuals gather political information affects the quality of political representation, the policy-making process, and the stability of the democratic system.

    “Given that a substantial proportion of citizens now rely mostly on the Internet to gather political information, 21 the policy implications of this issue are obvious: how individuals gather political information affects the quality of political representation, the policy-making process, and the stability of the democratic system (Mutz 2002).”

    From Birds of the Same Feather Tweet Together: Bayesian Ideal Point Estimation Using Twitter Data (2015) · cites this paper as Mutz 2002

    The Discussion (page not specified) reports modest consequences of cross-cutting political communication networks for political tolerance and democratic legitimacy. This supports the general idea that political communication matters for democracy, but the paper does not establish effects on the quality of political representation, policy-making, or the stability of the democratic system. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Diverse social networks expose individuals to different political points of view and foster tolerance for opposing viewpoints, which should ameliorate affective polarization.

    “This is also related to a long tradition of work showing that diverse social networks-which expose individuals to different political points of view-foster tolerance for opposing viewpoints, which should also ameliorate affective polarization (Mutz 2002).”

    From The Origins and Consequences of Affective Polarization in the United States (2019) · cites this paper as Mutz 2002

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Allport, Gordon W. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  2. Altemeyer, Bob. 1996. The Authoritarian Specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  3. Amir, Yehuda. 1969. "Contact Hypothesis in Ethnic Relations." Psychological Bulletin 71 (May): 319-42.
  4. Amir, Yehuda. 1976. "The Role of Intergroup Contact in Change of Prejudice and Ethnic Relations." in Towards the Elimination of Racism, ed. Phyllis A. Katz. New York: Pergamon Press.
  5. Arendt, Hannah. 1968. "Truth and Politics." In Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Thought, ed. Hannah Arendt. New York: Viking Press.
  6. Baldassare. Mark. 1985. "Trust in Local Government." Social Science Quarterly 66 (September): 704-12.
  7. Benhabib, Seyla. 1992. Situating the Self. New York: Routledge.
  8. Burnstein, Eugene, Amiram Vinokur, and Yacov Trope. 1973. "Inter- personal Comparison Versus Persuasive Argumentation; A More Direct Test of Alternative Explanations for Group-Induced Shifts in Individual Choice." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 9 (May): 236-45.
  9. Norman Miller and Marilynn B. Brewer. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
  10. Dalton, Russell, Paul A. Beck, and Robert Huckfeldt. 1998. "Par- tisan Cues and the Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presi- dential Election." American Political Science Review 92 (March): 111-26.
  11. Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  12. Fearon, James. 1998. "Deliberation as Discussion." In Deliberative Democracy, ed. Jon Elster. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Fishkin, James S. 1991. Democracy and Deliberation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
  14. Frey, William H. 1995. "The New Geography of Population Shifts: Trends Toward Balkanization." In State of the Union: America in the 1990s, Vol. 2, ed. Reynolds Farley. New York: Russell Sage.
  15. Gray, John. 1995. "Does Democracy Have a Future?" New York Times Book Review January 22.
  16. Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 1996. Democracy and Dis- agreement. Cambridge, MA: Harvard, Belknap Press.
  17. Harrison, Roderick J., and Claudette E. Bennett. 1995. "Racial and Ethnic Diversity." In State of the Union: America in the 1990s, Vol. 2, ed. Reynolds Farley. New York: Russell Sage.
  18. Huckfeldt, Robert, and John Sprague. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  19. Karatnycky, Adrian. 1999. "The Decline of Illiberal Democracy." Journal of Democracy 10 (January): 112-25.
  20. King, Gary, James Honaker, Anne Joseph, and Kenneth Scheve. 2001. "Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation." American Political Science Review 95 (1): 49-69.
  21. Kingwell, Mark. 1995. A Civil Tongue: Justice, Dialogue, and the Pol- itics of Pluralism. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
  22. Kuklinski, James H., Ellen Riggle, Victor Ottati, Norbert Schwarz, and Robert S. Wyer, Jr. 1991. "The Cognitive and Affective Bases of Political Tolerance Judgments." American Journal of Political Science 35 (February): 1-27.
  23. Lowry, Nancy, and David W. Johnson. 1981. "Effects of Controversy on Epistemic Curiosity, Achievement and Attitudes." Journal of Social Psychology 115 (October): 31-43.
  24. Manin, Bernard. 1987. "On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation." Political Theory 15 (3): 338-68.
  25. Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  26. Diana C. 1998. Impersonal Influence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Pettigrew, Thomas F. 1997. "Generalized Intergroup Contact Ef- fects on Prejudice." Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 23 (February): 173-85.
  28. Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T. 1977. "Forewarning, Cognitive Responding and Resistance to Persuasion." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 35 (September): 645-55.
  29. Petty, Richard E., and Cacioppo, John T. 1979. "Issue Involvement Can Increase or Decrease Persuasion by Enhancing Message- Relevant Cognitive Responses." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 37 (October): 1915-26.
  30. Piaget, Jean. 1932. The Moral Judgment of the Child, trans. M. Gabain. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
  31. Reich, Carol, and Mary Purbhoo. 1975. "The Effects of Cross- Cultural Contact." Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science 7 (October): 313-27.
  32. Simmel, Georg. 1955. Conflict and the Web of Group Affiliations, trans. K. H. Wolff. New York: Free Press.
  33. Smith, Karl A., David W. Johnson, and Roger T. Johnson. 1981. "Can Conflict be Constructive? Controversy Versus Concurrence Seek- ing in Learning Groups." Journal of Educational Psychology 73 (October): 651-63.
  34. Smith, Karl A., Renne P. Petersen, David W. Johnson, and Roger T. Johnson. 1992. "The Effects of Controversy and Concurrence Seeking on Effective Decision Making." Journal of Social Psychol- ogy 126 (2): 237-48.
  35. Sullivan, John L., James Piereson, and George E. Marcus. 1982. Political Tolerance and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  36. George E. Marcus and Russell L. Hanson. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. Pp. 249-72.
  37. Weigert, Kathleen Mass. 1976. "Intergroup Contact and Attitudes About a Third Group: A Survey of Black soldiers' Perceptions." International Journal of Group Tension 6: 110-24.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MUTZ, D. C.
Affiliations
The Ohio State University (US)
Corresponding author
MUTZ, DIANA C.
ORCID
MUTZ, DIANA C.
Venue
American Political Science Review
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2002-03
Volume
96
Issue
1
Pages
111-126
ISSN
  • 0003-0554 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5943
DOI
10.1017/s0003055402004264
OpenAlex
W2167701324
Cited by
1,069
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 37 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 65 · 2020: 90 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 54 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 40 · 2012: 51
FWCI
139.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 733 d)
Locations
  • American Political Science Review (publishedVersion)
  • ScholarlyCommons (University of Pennsylvania) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
Keywords
political discussion networks, political tolerance, political dissonance, democratic theory, political socialization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review