The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Socially Networked Heterogeneity: The Influence of WhatsApp as a Social Networking Site on Polarisation in Kenya
Abstract
Using a cross-sectional survey of two sampled counties in Kenya, this article analyses whether social networking sites reflect social network heterogeneity. It then examines how social network heterogeneity influences polarisation in Kenya. Three types of polarisation are examined: party, ethnic and ideological (around county resources). The study focuses specifically on the public WhatsApp platform (the most popular SNS in Kenya). To assess this empirical data, theoretical perspectives are drawn from the literatures on incidental and selective exposure and their impact on political polarisation. The findings indicate that the randomised composition of a WhatsApp group through public links indeed reflects social network heterogeneity. The findings further show that posting political news, obtaining political news and commenting on political news influence social network heterogeneity to some degree. This social network heterogeneity was also found to influence all three (party, ideological and ethnic) types of polarisation in varying but significant degrees.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Increasing polarization was also linked to exposure to viewpoints opposed to one’s own on social media feeds69,123.”
From A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy (2022) · cites this paper as [123]
Citations
Cites
Polarization and Partisan Selective Exposure
Stroud, N. J. (2010) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x · Cited by 1,346
Research works printed but not linked: 79
- Ahn J., 2012, The Information Society, 28, 99, 10.1080/01972243.2011.649394 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.021 · DOI
- Berg-Schlosser D., 1982, Comparative Politics, 14, 397, 10.2307/421630 · DOI
- 10.1177/0093650209333023 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2011.648949 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.socnet.2014.04.001 · DOI
- Boulianne S., 2015, Information, Communication and Society, 18, 523, 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542 · DOI
- 10.1080/03056240600671183 · DOI
- Brites M. J., 2014, Participation: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 11, 130
- 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.039 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.078 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.121003.091630 · DOI
- 10.1080/17531055.2013.871181 · DOI
- 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/17531055.2013.874105 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0003055407070554 · DOI
- 10.1080/13183222.2013.11009108 · DOI
- Ellison N. B., 2007, Interactions Magazine, 16, 6, 10.1145/1456202.1456204 · DOI
- 10.1177/1461444812462844 · DOI
- Eveland W. P., 2009, Journal of Communication, 59, 205, 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x · DOI
- 10.1057/cep.2012.18 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11109-011-9185-6 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1461444812439551 · DOI
- 10.1080/13510347.2013.853174 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.031 · DOI
- 10.1177/1931243116672257 · DOI
- Johnson K., 2013, Behaviour and Information Technology, 32, 24, 10.1080/0144929X.2010.550063 · DOI
- 10.1080/14662043.2014.957500 · DOI
- 10.1080/02589000903216930 · DOI
- 10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662 · DOI
- Kamau S. C., 2017, South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research, 43, 128
- Kanyinga K., 2014, Kenya: Democracy and Political Participation
- 10.1177/1077699015596328 · DOI
- Kim Y., 2015, International Journal of Communication, 9, 2344
- 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.005 · DOI
- 10.1111/jcom.12034 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.033 · DOI
- 10.1353/jod.2011.0026 · DOI
- 10.1177/0093650211398356 · DOI
- 10.1111/jcom.12077 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.012 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.026 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2011.592648 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571 · DOI
- 10.1353/jod.2013.0048 · DOI
- 10.1177/0093650212466406 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/19331680903109402 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.045 · DOI
- 10.1080/23738871.2016.1249898 · DOI
- Ndlela M. N., 2017, Journal of African Media Studies, 9, 277, 10.1386/jams.9.2.277_1 · DOI
- Nir L., 2011, Political Studies, 59, 674, 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00873.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.001 · DOI
- 10.4018/978-1-4666-4197-6.ch016 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11109-009-9100-6 · DOI
- 10.1177/1369148115620989 · DOI
- 10.2753/JEI0021-3624440301 · DOI
- 10.1080/15205436.2014.940977 · DOI
- 10.1080/105846002317246506 · DOI
- Rathnayake C., 2017, Policy and Internet, 9, 444, 10.1002/poi3.157 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01475.x · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-9760.00148 · DOI · Paper page
- Tewksbury B. D., 2001, Journal of Media and Communications Studies, 78, 533
- 10.1002/asi.20835 · DOI
- Touré-Tillery M., 2014, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 328, 10.1111/spc3.12110 · DOI
- 10.1111/jcc4.12108 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01635.x · DOI
- 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0363 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2013.867356 · DOI
- 10.1111/jcc4.12199 · DOI
- Weir G. R. S., 2011, Information Security Technical Report, 16, 38, 10.1016/j.istr.2011.09.008 · DOI
- 10.1177/0002764213506208 · DOI
- 10.1177/1461444809342775 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01403.x · DOI
- 10.1111/jcc4.12046 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318 · DOI
- Xu B., 2011, Physics Letters A, 375, 2269, 10.1016/j.physleta.2011.05.014 · DOI
- 10.1177/0894439309335162 · DOI
Cited by
A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Oswald, L., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1 · Cited by 348
Metadata
- Authors
- Kibet, A., & Ward, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Salford, United Kingdom
- University of Salford, United Kingdom,
- Venue
- African Journalism Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-10-02
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 42-66
- ISSN
- 2374-3670
- 2374-3689
- Cited by
- 7
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
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: Socially Networked Heterogeneity: The Influence of WhatsApp as a Social Networking Site on Polarisation in Kenya. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/23743670.2018.1537979
- The paper
- Kibet, A., & Ward, S. (2018). Socially Networked Heterogeneity: The Influence of WhatsApp as a Social Networking Site on Polarisation in Kenya. African Journalism Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/23743670.2018.1537979
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.