Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7

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

Kibet, Amos, Ward, Stephen·2018·African Journalism Studies
DOI 10.1080/23743670.2018.1537979
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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

Crossref · 10.1080/23743670.2018.1537979

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 79

  1. Ahn J., 2012, The Information Society, 28, 99, 10.1080/01972243.2011.649394 · DOI
  2. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.021 · DOI
  3. Berg-Schlosser D., 1982, Comparative Politics, 14, 397, 10.2307/421630 · DOI
  4. 10.1177/0093650209333023 · DOI
  5. 10.1080/1369118X.2011.648949 · DOI
  6. 10.1016/j.socnet.2014.04.001 · DOI
  7. Boulianne S., 2015, Information, Communication and Society, 18, 523, 10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008542 · DOI
  8. 10.1080/03056240600671183 · DOI
  9. Brites M. J., 2014, Participation: Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 11, 130
  10. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01509.x · DOI
  11. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.039 · DOI
  12. 10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.078 · DOI
  13. 10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.121003.091630 · DOI
  14. 10.1080/17531055.2013.871181 · DOI
  15. 10.1188/14.ONF.545-547 · DOI · Paper page
  16. 10.1080/17531055.2013.874105 · DOI
  17. 10.1017/S0003055407070554 · DOI
  18. 10.1080/13183222.2013.11009108 · DOI
  19. Ellison N. B., 2007, Interactions Magazine, 16, 6, 10.1145/1456202.1456204 · DOI
  20. 10.1177/1461444812462844 · DOI
  21. Eveland W. P., 2009, Journal of Communication, 59, 205, 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x · DOI
  22. 10.1057/cep.2012.18 · DOI
  23. 10.1007/s11109-011-9185-6 · DOI · Paper page
  24. 10.1177/1461444812439551 · DOI
  25. 10.1080/13510347.2013.853174 · DOI
  26. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.031 · DOI
  27. 10.1177/1931243116672257 · DOI
  28. Johnson K., 2013, Behaviour and Information Technology, 32, 24, 10.1080/0144929X.2010.550063 · DOI
  29. 10.1080/14662043.2014.957500 · DOI
  30. 10.1080/02589000903216930 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/10584609.2018.1426662 · DOI
  32. Kamau S. C., 2017, South African Journal for Communication Theory and Research, 43, 128
  33. Kanyinga K., 2014, Kenya: Democracy and Political Participation
  34. 10.1177/1077699015596328 · DOI
  35. Kim Y., 2015, International Journal of Communication, 9, 2344
  36. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.005 · DOI
  37. 10.1111/jcom.12034 · DOI
  38. 10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.033 · DOI
  39. 10.1353/jod.2011.0026 · DOI
  40. 10.1177/0093650211398356 · DOI
  41. 10.1111/jcom.12077 · DOI
  42. 10.1016/j.chb.2014.02.012 · DOI
  43. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.01.026 · DOI
  44. 10.1080/1369118X.2011.592648 · DOI
  45. 10.1080/1369118X.2013.871571 · DOI
  46. 10.1353/jod.2013.0048 · DOI
  47. 10.1177/0093650212466406 · DOI · Paper page
  48. 10.1080/19331680903109402 · DOI
  49. 10.1016/j.chb.2015.06.045 · DOI
  50. 10.1080/23738871.2016.1249898 · DOI
  51. Ndlela M. N., 2017, Journal of African Media Studies, 9, 277, 10.1386/jams.9.2.277_1 · DOI
  52. Nir L., 2011, Political Studies, 59, 674, 10.1111/j.1467-9248.2010.00873.x · DOI
  53. 10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.001 · DOI
  54. 10.4018/978-1-4666-4197-6.ch016 · DOI
  55. 10.1007/s11109-009-9100-6 · DOI
  56. 10.1177/1369148115620989 · DOI
  57. 10.2753/JEI0021-3624440301 · DOI
  58. 10.1080/15205436.2014.940977 · DOI
  59. 10.1080/105846002317246506 · DOI
  60. Rathnayake C., 2017, Policy and Internet, 9, 444, 10.1002/poi3.157 · DOI
  61. 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01475.x · DOI
  62. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x · DOI
  63. 10.1111/1467-9760.00148 · DOI · Paper page
  64. Tewksbury B. D., 2001, Journal of Media and Communications Studies, 78, 533
  65. 10.1002/asi.20835 · DOI
  66. Touré-Tillery M., 2014, Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 328, 10.1111/spc3.12110 · DOI
  67. 10.1111/jcc4.12108 · DOI
  68. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01635.x · DOI
  69. 10.1287/mnsc.1050.0363 · DOI
  70. 10.1080/1369118X.2013.867356 · DOI
  71. 10.1111/jcc4.12199 · DOI
  72. Weir G. R. S., 2011, Information Security Technical Report, 16, 38, 10.1016/j.istr.2011.09.008 · DOI
  73. 10.1177/0002764213506208 · DOI
  74. 10.1177/1461444809342775 · DOI
  75. 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01403.x · DOI
  76. 10.1111/jcc4.12046 · DOI
  77. 10.1080/1369118X.2013.871318 · DOI
  78. Xu B., 2011, Physics Letters A, 375, 2269, 10.1016/j.physleta.2011.05.014 · DOI
  79. 10.1177/0894439309335162 · DOI

Cited by

See all 7

Metadata

Authors
Kibet, A., & Ward, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Salford, United Kingdom
  • University of Salford, United Kingdom,
ORCID
Venue
African Journalism Studies
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2018-10-02
Volume
39
Issue
4
Pages
42-66
ISSN
  • 2374-3670
  • 2374-3689
DOI
10.1080/23743670.2018.1537979
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

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.