Political Talk, Conversation, Discussion, Debate, or Deliberation?
An Interpersonal Political Communication Definition and Typology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29105/gmjmx17.33-1Keywords:
political communication, interpersonal communication, deliberation, public dialogue, political discussionAbstract
Interpersonal communication is at the core of every form of human communication system, and the realm of political communication is no exception. Through interpersonal communication, individuals gain knowledge about the political world, understand the common goals and values of their political system, and learn how to participate in political tasks. As do many other research areas, interpersonal communication research faces numerous challenges. There is a lack of conceptual organization and precision about names and labels such as political talk, political conversation, public dialogue, political dialogue, political discussion, political debate, and political deliberation. Apparently, these expressions refer to the same idea: interpersonal communications that fall into the political realm. However, each term has a diverse epistemological, normative, and theoretical background and represents a different way of conceptualizing this idea. This essay suggests a general definition for interpersonal political communication and a matrix that organizes the existing academic knowledge about this topic.
Downloads
References
Althaus, S. L. (2012). What’s good and bad in political communication research? Normative standards for evaluating media and citizen performance. In H. A. Semetko & M. Scammell (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of political communication (pp. 97–112). SAGE.
Amsalem, E., & Nir, L. (2019). Does interpersonal discussion increase political knowledge? A meta-analysis. Communication Research, 0093650219866357. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219866357
Bimber, B. (2012). Digital media and citizenship. In H. A. Semetko & M. Scammell (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of political communication. SAGE.
Blake, R. H. (1972). Medio communication: A conceptualization. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED062785
Bohman, J. (2006). Deliberative democracy and the epistemic benefits of diversity. Episteme, 3(03), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2006.3.3.175
Burleson, B. R. (2009). The nature of interpersonal communication. In C. R. Berger, M. E. Roloff, & D. R. Ewoldsen (Eds.), The Handbook of communication science (2nd ed., pp. 145–163). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Chadwick, A. (2013). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press.
Chirawurah, D., Fishkin, J., Santuah, N., Siu, A., Bawah, A., Kranjac-Berisavljevic, G., & Giles, K. (2019). Deliberation for development: Ghana’s first deliberative poll. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 15(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.314
Craig, R. (1999). Communication theory as a field. Communication Theory, 9(2), 119–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.1999.tb00355.x
Crandinetti, F. (2008). Political elites. In K. Warren (Ed.), Encyclopedia of U.S. campaigns, elections, and electoral behavior (pp. 517–517). SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963886
Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600590933160
Delli Carpini, M. X., Cook, F. L., & Jacobs, L. R. (2004). Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: A review of the empirical literature. Annual Review of Political Science, 7(1), 315–344. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.7.121003.091630
Druckman, J. N., & Nelson, K. R. (2003). Framing and deliberation: How citizens’ conversations limit elite influence. American Journal of Political Science, 47(4), 729–745. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5907.00051
Dryzek, J. S., Bächtiger, A., Chambers, S., Cohen, J., Druckman, J. N., Felicetti, A., Fishkin, J. S., Farrell, D. M., Fung, A., Gutmann, A., Landemore, H., Mansbridge, J., Marien, S., Neblo, M. A., Niemeyer, S., Setälä, M., Slothuus, R., Suiter, J., Thompson, D., & Warren, M. E. (2019). The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation. Science, 363(6432), 1144–1146. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaw2694
Eveland, W. P., Morey, A. C., & Hutchens, M. J. (2011). Beyond deliberation: New directions for the study of informal political conversation from a communication perspective. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1082–1103. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01598.x
Fishkin, J. S., & Laslett, P. (2003). Debating deliberative democracy (Vol. 7). Blackwell.
Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2005). Experimenting with a democratic ideal: Deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40(3), 284–298.
Glover, T. D. (2018). Ordinary political conversation in seemingly nonpolitical leisure: All talk and no action? Leisure Sciences, 40(7), 723–734. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2018.1534626
Goodin, R. E. (2012). How can deliberative democracy get a grip? The Political Quarterly, 83(4), 806–811. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-923X.2012.02356.x
Goodin, R. E. (2017). The epistemic benefits of deliberative democracy. Policy Sciences, 50(3), 351–366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-017-9286-0
Habermas, J. (1962). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. MIT Press.
Habermas, J. (1985a). The theory of communicative action, Volume 1: Reason and the rationalization of society (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (1985b). The theory of communicative action, Volume 2: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason (T. McCarthy, Trans.). Beacon Press.
Habermas, J. (2006). Political communication in media society: Does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research. Communication Theory, 16(4), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00280.x
Ikeda, K., & Boase, J. (2011). Multiple discussion networks and their consequence for political participation. Communication Research, 38(5), 660–683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210395063
Kim, H. M., & Baek, Y. M. (2018). The power of political talk: How and when it mobilizes politically efficacious citizens’ campaign activity during elections. Asian Journal of Communication, 28(3), 264–280. https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2018.1431295
Kim, J., & Kim, E. J. (2008). Theorizing dialogic deliberation: Everyday political talk as communicative action and dialogue. Communication Theory, 18(1), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00313.x
Kim, J., Wyatt, R. O., & Katz, E. (1999). News, talk, opinion, participation: The part played by conversation in deliberative democracy. Political Communication, 16(4), 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198541
Kim, N., Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2018). Intergroup contact in deliberative contexts: Evidence from deliberative polls. Journal of Communication, 68(6), 1029–1051. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy056
Larrosa-Fuentes, J. S. (2017). The political communication systems model. En Communication and the Body Politic: Hillary Clinton's 2016 Presidential Campaign in Philadelphia's Latino Community (pp.20-43) [Tesis Doctoral, Temple University]. http://digital.library.temple.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p245801coll10/id/507196
Manning, J. (2020). Interpersonal communication. In D. L. Merskin (Ed.), The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society (Vol. 2, pp. 842–845). Sage Publications.
Martín Serrano, M. (1994). La comunicación pública y la supervivencia. Diálogos de La Comunicación, 39, 5–11. https://eprints.ucm.es/13246/
McLeod, D. M., Kosicki, G. M., & McLeod, J. M. (2008). Political Communication Effects. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (Eds.), Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research (pp. 228–251). Taylor & Francis.
Morey, A. C., & Yamamoto, M. (2020). Exploring political discussion motivations: Relationships with different forms of political talk. Communication Studies, 71(1), 78–97. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2019.1692885
Pennington, N., & Winfrey, K. L. (2020). Engaging in political talk on Facebook: Investigating the role of interpersonal goals and cognitive engagement. Communication Studies, 0(0), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2020.1819844
Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Friedland, L. A. (2011). A communicative approach to social capital. Journal of Communication, 61(4), 689–712. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01571.x
Settle, J. E., & Carlson, T. N. (2019). Opting out of political discussions. Political Communication, 36(3), 476–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1561563
Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Nah, S., Gotlieb, M. R., Hwang, H., Lee, N.-J., Scholl, R. M., & McLeod, D. M. (2007). Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: Extending the communication mediation model. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 676–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00363.x
Shugars, S., & Beauchamp, N. (2019). Why keep arguing? Predicting engagement in political conversations online. SAGE Open, 9(1), 2158244019828850. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019828850
Sørensen, M. P. (2016). Political conversations on Facebook – the participation of politicians and citizens. Media, Culture & Society, 38(5), 664–685. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443715620924
Stromer-Galley, J. (2002). New voices in the public sphere: Political conversation in the Internet age [Ph.D., University of Pennsylvania]. http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.temple.edu/docview/305534103/abstract?accountid=14270
Stromer-Galley, J. (2004). Interactivity-as-product and interactivity-as-process. The Information Society, 20(5), 391–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240490508081
Valeriani, A., & Vaccari, C. (2018). Political talk on mobile instant messaging services: A comparative analysis of Germany, Italy, and the U.K. Information, Communication & Society, 21(11), 1715–1731. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1350730
Valo, M. (2011). What is mobile interpersonal communication? Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 3(1), 3–7. https://doi.org/10.1386/iscc.3.1.3_2
Vliegenthart, R., & Zoonen, L. van. (2011). Power to the frame: Bringing sociology back to frame analysis. European Journal of Communication, 26(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323111404838
Wright, S., & Street, J. (2007). Democracy, deliberation and design: the case of online discussion forums. New Media & Society, 9(5), 849–869. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807081230
Wyatt, R., Katz, E., & Kim, J. (2000). Bridging the spheres: Political and personal conversation in public and private spaces. Journal of Communication, 50(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2000.tb02834.x
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Global Media Journal México, publicación semestral, editada por el Departamento de Psicología y Comunicación de Texas A&M International University, Laredo, Texas, Estados Unidos; y la Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación de la Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, México. Editores responsables: Dr. José Carlos Lozano y Dr. Francisco Javier Martínez Garza. Datos de contactos: jose.lozano@tamiu.edu, tel. (956) 326-3117 y francisco.martinezgz@uanl.edu.mx, teléfono (81) 83294000, Ext. 7710 y 7711. Reserva de derechos al uso exclusivo número 04 – 2017- 080814012900- 203, expedido por la Dirección de Reservas de Derechos del Instituto Nacional del Derecho de Autor. ISSN: 2007-2031. El editor no necesariamente comparte el contenido de los artículos, ya que son responsabilidad exclusiva de los autores. Se prohíbe la reproducción total o parcial del contenido, ilustraciones y textos publicados en este número sin la previa autorización que por escrito emita el editor.
