The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy
Abstract
Deliberative democracy can be defined as a political system based on citizens' free discussion of public issues. While most scholars have discussed deliberative democracy normatively, this study attempts to test the validity of a model of deliberative democracy through examining the interrelationships among its four components: newsmedia use, political conversation, opinion formation, and political participation. Sufficient empirical evidence was found to support the hypotheses that (a) news-media use is closely associated with the frequency of political conversation in daily life both at general and issue-specific levels; (b) willingness to argue with those who have different opinions is influenced by majority perceptions and by news-media use and political talk; (c) news-media use and political conversation have positive effects on certain measures of the quality of opinions (argument quality, consideredness, and opinionation) and perhaps on opinion consistency; and (d) news-media use and political conversation are closely associated also with participatory activities, but more so with "campaigning" than "complaining."
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785 · cited 3×
“of Discussion on Opinion,” Lasker (1949) points out, “ Our opinions can remain unformed and mutually contradictory for a long time unless a discussion or some other stimulus forces us to reconsider them.” Many contemporary scholars such as Zaller (1992, 1996) , Zaller and Feldman (1992), Price (1992), Page and Shapiro…”
BackgroundInfluentialKuhn, D. (1991) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511571350 · Cited by 2,094
Cited by
Good News for the Future? Young People, Internet Use, and Political Participation
Bakker, T. P., & de Vreese, C. H. (2011) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650210381738 · Cited by 594
Does Disagreement Contribute to More Deliberative Opinion?
Price, V., Cappella, J. N., & Nir, L. (2002) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/105846002317246506 · Cited by 441
Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of Communication Effects
Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x · Cited by 361
Collective preferences in democratic politics: opinion surveys and the will of the people
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-1221 · Cited by 274
Borah, P. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212449353 · Cited by 206
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E.
- Venue
- Political Communication
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1999-11
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 361-385
- ISSN
- 1058-4609 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-7675
- OpenAlex
- W2002326091
- Cited by
- 397
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 33.46
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/105846099198541
- The paper
- Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, Talk, Opinion, Participation: The Part Played by Conversation in Deliberative Democracy. Political Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198541
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
