The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Whose voice is heard in online deliberation?: A study of participation and representation in political debates on the internet
Abstract
One of the core elements of the vision of ‘electronic democracy’ is the hope that the Internet permits free and equal access to political debates. However, experiences with online discourse challenge this view. The digital divide being one obstacle to participation, even more interesting is the fact that online communication is constrained in ways similar to the offline world. This paper attempts to reassess the question of whether the Internet makes political debate more open to voices that are normally not heard in the political field. Based on empirical evidence from a large-scale online deliberation, it analyses who participates in political debates on the Internet and whose views are represented. The results challenge both the optimistic and the sceptical view on electronic democracy. A theoretical model is developed that is able to explain the results. It extends current research by including the cultural practices of technology use and the specific effects of large-scale communication in the analysis. Though preliminary this model can help to inform the designers of online deliberations to make the most of their democratic potential.
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
Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital
Putnam, R. D. (1995) · Journal of Democracy · doi:10.1353/jod.1995.0002 · Cited by 14,037
Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy
Habermas, J. (1996) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1564.001.0001 · Cited by 9,998
Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory
McCarthy, J. D., & Zald, M. N. (1977) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/226464 · Cited by 7,381
Voice and Equality: Civic Voluntarism in American Politics
VERBA, S., SCHLOZMAN, K. L., & BRADY, H. E. (1995) · Harvard University Press eBooks · doi:10.2307/j.ctv1pnc1k7 · Cited by 6,626
Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet
Turkle, S. (1997) · Cumulative Index of Computer Aided Architectural Design · Cited by 6,329
Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics
(1996) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-3597 · Cited by 5,186
Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet worldwide
(2002) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.40-1165 · Cited by 2,937
Social Implications of the Internet
DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.307 · Cited by 2,027
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
(2018) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/(issn)1083-6101 · Cited by 1,883
Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science
Dryzek, J. S. (1990) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781139173810 · Cited by 1,181
Cited by
Public deliberation on government-managed social media: A study on Weibo users in China
Medaglia, R., & Zhu, D. (2017) · Government Information Quarterly · doi:10.1016/j.giq.2017.05.003 · Cited by 114
Metadata
- Authors
- Albrecht, S.
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2006-02
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 62-82
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W2053923461
- Cited by
- 278
- References
- 47
- FWCI
- 22.68
- 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: Whose voice is heard in online deliberation?: A study of participation and representation in political debates on the internet. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13691180500519548
- The paper
- Albrecht, S. (2006). Whose voice is heard in online deliberation?: A study of participation and representation in political debates on the internet. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180500519548
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.