Cited by 55Social Media and PoliticsElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and Politics

Meta-analysis of the relationship between Internet use and political participation: examining main and moderating effects

Chae, Younggil, Lee, Sookjung, Kim, Yeolib·2019·Asian Journal of Communication

Abstract

Although a growing number of studies are examining the relationship between Internet use and political participation, varying study characteristics make the overall effect size difficult to estimate. Using a meta-analysis, we estimated the mean effect size and tested whether the effect size was influenced by study characteristics. Data for this meta-analysis were derived from 56 papers reporting 63 independent studies. Results revealed that Internet use had a weak relationship with political participation (rc = .22). Moderator analyses demonstrated that type of Internet use, Internet use measure, Internet use for news, type of political participation, sample origin, and survey year significantly moderated the relationship between Internet use and political participation. For instance, Internet use including news (rc = .27) had a significantly stronger relationship with political participation than did Internet use excluding news (rc = .19). European samples (rc = .27) had the largest mean correlation followed by North American samples (rc = .23) and Asian samples (rc = .18) in decreasing order of strength of relationship. The theoretical and methodological implications of the findings are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01292986.2018.1499121

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The body of correlational evidence supported a beneficial association between digital media use and political participation and mobilization.

    “Consistent with past meta-analyses42,43,45, the body of correlational evidence supported a beneficial association between digital media use and political participation and mobilization.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chae, Y., Lee, S., & Kim, Y.
Affiliations
  • Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (KR)
  • School of Media and Communication, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, South Korea
  • Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology (KR)
Venue
Asian Journal of Communication
Published
2018-07-16
Volume
29
Issue
1
Pages
35-54
ISSN
  • 0129-2986 (ISSN-L)
  • 1742-0911
OpenAlex
W2883952789
Cited by
55
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3
FWCI
1.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Asian Journal of Communication (publishedVersion)
  • Scholarworks@UNIST (Ulsan National Institute of Science and Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
Keywords
internet use, political participation, online news use, moderating effect, effect size, cross-national differences

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