All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.

Deliberation or Small Talk? Motivations for Public Discussion and their Effects on Civic Engagement
Unformatted Document Text:  Motivations for Public Discussion other relationships and variables in the model. In addition, SEM allowed us to quantify both direct and indirect relationships between motivations, frequency of discussion online and offline, and civic engagement. Before fitting the theorized model (see Figure 1) to the data set, a residualized covariance matrix among the key endogenous variables (i.e., motivations, discussion frequency and civic participation) was created with a partial correlation matrix controlling for the other variables (i.e., demographics, news use and network size). By using the residualized covariance matrix as input in the estimation of the structural model, the results will already be taking into account the influence of the control variables. The regression analyses were performed in SPSS 18.0, while the SEM was estimated using Mplus 6.0 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2010). <INSERT FIGURE 1> Results Our first two hypotheses suggest that civic motivations for discussion leads to more frequent conversations about public affairs, and that this relationship applies to both face-to-face (H1) and online interactions (H2). To test these predictions, we estimated hierarchical regression models separately for interpersonal discussion and online discussion. As shown in Table 3, both models had a fairly strong predictive power, explaining 48% of the variance in interpersonal discussion and 44% of the variance in online discussion. Motivations, in particular, accounted for 13% and 9% of incremental variance in interpersonal and online discussion, respectively. Most importantly, civic motivations contributed positively and significantly to face-to-face conversations about public affairs ( = .346, β p < .001), and the same was true for online forms of discussion ( = .204, β p < .001). These results strongly support H1 and H2, as they confirm that public discussions are motivated by civic-oriented goals, such as individuals’ desire to learn information, express an opinion and persuade others. 12

Authors: Valenzuela, Sebastian., Jeong, Sun Ho. and Gil de Zuniga, Homero.
first   previous   Page 12 of 32   next   last

background image
Motivations for Public Discussion
other relationships and variables in the model. In addition, SEM allowed us to quantify both direct 
and indirect relationships between motivations, frequency of discussion online and offline, and 
civic engagement. Before fitting the theorized model (see Figure 1) to the data set, a residualized  
covariance matrix among the key endogenous variables (i.e., motivations, discussion frequency 
and   civic   participation)   was   created   with   a   partial   correlation   matrix   controlling   for   the   other 
variables (i.e., demographics, news use and network size). By using the residualized covariance 
matrix as input in the estimation of the structural model, the results will already be taking into 
account the influence of the control variables. The regression analyses were performed in SPSS 
18.0, while the SEM was estimated using Mplus 6.0 (Muthén & Muthén, 1998-2010).
Our first two hypotheses suggest that civic motivations for discussion leads to more 
frequent conversations about public affairs, and that this relationship applies to both face-to-face 
(H1) and online interactions (H2). To test these predictions, we estimated hierarchical regression 
models separately for interpersonal discussion and online discussion. As shown in Table 3, both 
models had a fairly strong predictive power, explaining 48% of the variance in interpersonal 
discussion and 44% of the variance in online discussion. Motivations, in particular, accounted for 
13% and 9% of incremental variance in interpersonal and online discussion, respectively. Most 
importantly, civic motivations contributed positively and significantly to face-to-face 
conversations about public affairs (  = .346, 
p < .001), and the same was true for online forms of 
discussion (  = .204, 
p < .001). These results strongly support H1 and H2, as they confirm that 
public discussions are motivated by civic-oriented goals, such as individuals’ desire to learn 
information, express an opinion and persuade others.

Submission, Review, and Scheduling! All Academic Convention can help with all of your abstract management needs and many more. Contact us today for a quote!
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 12 of 32   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.