The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Internet Use and Civic Engagement
Abstract
Conclusions about the impact of the Internet on civic engagement have been hampered by the unavailability of before and after measures, a shortage of varied and multiple indicators of attitudes and behaviors regarding engagement, and insufficient attention to generational differences. This article seeks to address these weaknesses by employing a quasi-experimental design that draws on the 1982 and 1997 waves of a panel study that began with a national sample of the high school class of 1965 and that also includes that generation's lineage successor. Comparisons between those using and not using the Internet demonstrated that the digital divide, the original pre-Internet gap in civic engagement, remained in place or increased slightly over time. Taking into account pre-Internet levels of civic engagement and key socioeconomic characteristics indicates that Internet access has positive effects on several indicators of civic engagement. Comparisons of civic engagement among Internet users according to how much they employ the Internet for political purposes revealed modest bivariate associations and very little independent effect at the multivariate level. The connection between the Internet and civic engagement differed across the two generations in some respects, explained in part by intergenerational divergence in the intersection between the stage of individual political development and incorporation of the Internet into a person's media repertory.
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
Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?
Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.53.9.1017 · Cited by 4,793
Online and in the know: uses and gratifications of the web for political information
Kaye, B. K., & Johnson, T. J. (2002) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4601_4 · Cited by 492
Cited by
Frenemies: How Social Media Polarizes America
Settle, J. E. (2018) · doi:10.1017/9781108560573 · Cited by 377
Oser, J., & Boulianne, S. (2020) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1093/poq/nfaa017 · Cited by 82
Chae, Y., Lee, S., & Kim, Y. (2019) · Asian Journal of Communication · doi:10.1080/01292986.2018.1499121 · Cited by 55
Technology and Opportunity: People with Serious Mental Illness and Social Connection
Townsend, L., Zippay, A., Caler, K., & Forenza, B. (2016) · Journal of the Society for Social Work and Research · doi:10.1086/686882 · Cited by 19
(2015) · International journal of communication · Cited by 15
Utz, S., & Maaß, C. H. (2018) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.021 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Jennings, M. K., & Zeitner, V.
- Venue
- Public Opinion Quarterly
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 311-334
- ISSN
- 0033-362X (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5331
- OpenAlex
- W2170253076
- Cited by
- 447
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 46.91
- 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
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.