Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
The Korean Society for Journalism & Communication (KSJCS)
[ Article ]
Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication - Vol. 69, No. 1, pp.39-78
ISSN: 2586-7369 (Online)
Print publication date 28 Feb 2025
Received 06 Dec 2024 Revised 27 Jan 2025 Accepted 03 Feb 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2025.69.1.002

유튜브 뉴스의 사회적시청 과정에서 정치표현이 정치적 태도극화에 미치는 영향

엄기영** ; 김나래*** ; 박진우****
**MBC 보도국 기자, 부장 fortuna@mbc.co.kr
***University of Nevada, Reno, Reynolds School of Journalism, 조교수 naraek@unr.edu
****한양대학교 미디어커뮤니케이션학과 조교수 creativejw10@hanyang.ac.kr
Impact of Political Expression on Political Attitude Polarization in the Social Viewing Process of YouTube News
Ki-young Eom** ; Narae Kim*** ; Jinwoo Park****
**Ph.D., Reporter, Editor, MBC fortuna@mbc.co.kr
***Assistant Professor of Advertising, Reynolds School of Journalism, University of Nevada, Reno naraek@unr.edu
****Assistant Professor, Dept, of Media Communication, Hanyang University, corresponding author creativejw10@hanyang.ac.kr

초록

뉴스를 접하는 주요 플랫폼으로 유튜브가 부상하면서, 정치적 태도극화가 심화된다는 우려가 커지고 있다. 본 연구는 이런 맥락에서 유튜브를 통한 뉴스 시청이 정치적 태도극화에 기여하는 메커니즘을 검증하기 위해 사회적 시청, 정파적 정치표현, 교차적 정치 표현, 정파적 뉴스 미디어의 선택적 노출이 정치적 태도극화에 미치는 관계에 초점을 맞췄다. 이러한 관계의 탐색은 뉴스 이용의 단순한 양적 측면을 넘어 이용자의 적극성, 다양한 관점에 대한 노출과 표현 행위, 타인과의 소통 등이 뉴스 이용 과정에서 어떤 상호작용을 일으키는지 알아보는 데 도움을 줄 수 있다.

본 연구의 주요 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫 번째로 유튜브 뉴스의 사회적 시청이 정치적 태도극화에 미치는 영향을 정치표현이 매개하는 것으로 밝혀졌다. 구체적으로 사회적 시청을 많이 하는 사람들은 교차적 정치표현의 정도가 늘어났고 그 결과 정치적 태도극화가 감소하는 것으로 밝혀졌다. 또한 사회적 시청을 많이 하는 사람들은 정파적 정치표현의 정도 역시 증가했는데, 이는 정치적 태도극화의 증가로 이어졌다. 유튜브 뉴스의 사회적 시청이 정치적 태도극화를 심화시킬수도 있지만 감소시킬수도 있는 가능성을 엿본 결과라 할 수 있다.

또 하나 주목할 만한 결과는 유튜브 뉴스의 사회적 시청 과정에서 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출 경향이 덜할수록 교차적 정치표현을 통한 정치적 태도극화의 완화효과가 더욱 뚜렷하게 나타났다는 것이다. 구체적으로 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출 경향이 약한 그룹에서 정치적 태도극화의 완화 효과가 가장 컸으며, 보통인 그룹에서도 이런 완화 효과가 통계적으로 유의미한 것으로 밝혀졌다. 하지만 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출 경향이 강한 그룹에서는 교차적 정치표현을 통한 정치적 태도극화 완화 효과가 관찰되지 않았다. 한편, 유튜브 뉴스의 사회적 시청 과정에서의 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출 경향 정도가 정파적 정치표현을 매개로 정치적 태도극화로 이어지는 경로에서는 매개조절효과가 검증되지 않았다. 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출 경향의 강도와 관계없이, 모든 그룹에서 정치적 태도극화가 심화되는것으로 밝혀진 것이다.

이 결과는 유튜브 뉴스 이용 과정에서 정치적 태도극화를 완화하기 위해 교차적 정치표현의 역할이 중요하다는 것을 의미한다. 이런 교차적 정치표현을 촉진하기 위해선 정치 성향에 따른 선택적 노출에서 벗어나 다양한 매체를 이용하려는 노력이 필수적이다. 이는 정파적 뉴스미디어의 선택적 노출의 조절효과를 통해 다양한 관점의 뉴스를 소비하는 것이 정치적 태도극화를 줄이는 데 중요한 역할을 한다는 본 연구의 결과로 설명할 수 있다. 이런 결과는 유튜브 뉴스 이용에서의 사회적 시청이 정치적 태도극화에 미치는 영향에 대한 이해의 폭을 넓혀주었다는 점에서 의미를 찾을 수 있다.

Abstract

The rise of YouTube as a primary news source has raised concerns about the escalation of political polarization. In order to investigate the mechanism through which watching news on YouTube contributes to political polarization, this study focuses on the relationships between social viewing, partisan political expression, cross-cutting political expression, and partisan news media exposure. Exploring these relationships goes beyond a simple quantitative understanding of news consumption and provides insight into how users’ active engagement, exposure to diverse perspectives, expressive behavior, and communication with others interact in the news consumption process. The main findings of this study are as follows. First, it was found that the effect of social viewing of YouTube news on political polarization was mediated by political expression. Specifically, individuals who engaged in higher levels of social viewing were more likely to engage in cross-cutting political expression, which in turn reduced political polarization. At the same time, those who engaged in higher levels of social viewing also tended to increase their partisan political expression, which led to a rise in political polarization. These results suggest that social viewing of news on YouTube can either exacerbate or mitigate political polarization. Another noteworthy finding is that, during the social viewing of news on YouTube the weaker the tendency toward partisan news media exposure, the more pronounced the mitigating effect of cross-cutting political expression on political polarization.

Specifically, the group with a weak tendency toward partisan news media exposure showed the strongest mitigation effect on political polarization, and even the group with an average tendency exhibited a statistically significant mitigating effect. However, in the group with a strong tendency toward partisan news media exposure, no mitigating effect of cross-cutting political expression on political polarization was observed. Meanwhile, in the pathway from social viewing of YouTube news to political polarization through partisan political expression, no moderated mediation effect was found for partisan news media exposure. In other words, political polarization was found to intensify across all groups, regardless of their degree of partisan news media exposure. These findings suggest that cross-cutting political expression plays a critical role in mitigating political polarization in the context of YouTube news consumption. In order to encourage such cross-cutting political expression, it is essential to move beyond selective exposure based on political orientation and make efforts to utilize a variety of media sources. This can be explained by the results of this study, which demonstrate that consuming news from diverse perspectives—through the moderating effect of partisan news media exposure—plays a key role in reducing political polarization. These findings are meaningful in that they broaden our understanding of how social viewing of news on YouTube influences political polarization.

Keywords:

social viewing, political expression, political polarization, partisan news media exposure, news on YouTube

키워드:

사회적 시청, 정치 표현, 정치적 태도극화, 정파적 뉴스 미디어의 선택적 노출, 유튜브 뉴스

Acknowledgments

This study is based on the doctoral dissertation(2024, 8) of Ki-young Eom at Hanyang University(본 논문은 엄기영의 한양대학교 박사학위논문(2024, 8)의 일부를 수정·보완한 것임).

References

  • Bae, J-A., & Choi, S.-M. (2013). SNS interaction surrounding TV shows. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 30(1), 47-92.
    배진아·최소망 (2013). TV시청과 SNS 상호작용. <사이버커뮤니케이션학보>, 30권 1호, 47-92.
  • Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Hunzaker, M. F., & Volfovsky, A. (2018). Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(37), 9216-9221. [https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115]
  • Bakshy E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130-1132. [https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160]
  • Barker, D., & Knight, K. (2000). Political talk radio and public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 64(2), 149-170. [https://doi.org/10.1086/317760]
  • Barnidge, M., Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Diehl, T. (2017). Second screening and political persuasion on social media. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 61(2), 309-331. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1309416]
  • Barnidge, M., Gunther, A. C., Kim, J., Hong, Y., Perryman, M., Tay, S. K., & Knisely, S. (2020). Politically motivated selective exposure and perceived media bias. Communication Research, 47(1), 82-103. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650217713066]
  • Beam, M. A., Child, J. T., Hutchens, M. J., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2018). Context collapse and privacy management: Diversity in Facebook friends increases online news reading and sharing. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2296-2314. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817714790]
  • Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707-731. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00410.x]
  • Bond, R. M., Shulman, H. C., & Gilbert, M. (2018). Does having a political discussion help or hurt intergroup perceptions? Drawing guidance from social identity theory and the contact hypothesis. International Journal of Communication, 12, 4332-4352.
  • Brauer, M., Judd, C. M., & Gliner, M. D. (1995). The effects of repeated expressions on attitude polarization during group discussions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(6), 1014-1029. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.68.6.1014]
  • Chadwick, A. (2017). The hybrid media system: Politics and power. Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190696726.001.0001]
  • Chen, H. T. (2021). Second screening and the engaged public: The role of second screening for news and political expression in an OSROR model. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 98(2), 526-546. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699019866432]
  • Chen, H. T., Kim, Y., & Chan, M. (2022). Just a glance, or more? Pathways from counter-attitudinal incidental exposure to attitude (de)polarization through response behaviors and cognitive elaboration. Journal of Communication, 72(1), 83-110. [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqab046]
  • Cho, J., Ahmed, S., Keum, H., Choi, Y. J., & Lee, J. H. (2018). Influencing myself: Self-reinforcement through online political expression. Communication Research, 45(1), 83-111. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650216644020]
  • Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: Advancing an OSROR model of communication effects. Communication Theory, 19(1), 66-88. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x]
  • Choi, C. S., & Im, Y-H. (2021). Sentiment analysis as a research method on partisanship in the presidential coverage. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 65(1), 35-70. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2021.65.1.035 ]
    최창식·임영호 (2021). 대통령 관련 보도의 감성 분석과 정파성의 지형: 신문별 감성지수의 차이, 일관성, 대통령 지지도와의 관계를 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 65권 1호, 35-70.
  • Choi, J. (2015). The effects of cross-cutting exposure in online social network sites on political participation: Focusing on the cross-cutting observation, cross-cutting involvement, and strength of partisanship. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 59(5), 152-177.
    최지향 (2015). 온라인 소셜 네트워크 사이트 내에서의 이견노출이 정치참여에 미치는 영향: 이견관찰, 이견관여, 당파성을 중심으로. <한국언론학보>, 59권 5호, 152-177.
  • Choi, J., & Lee, H. (2023). Digital news reports in Korea 2023. Korea Press Foundation.
    최진호·이현우 (2023). <디지털 뉴스 리포트 2023 한국>. 한국언론진흥재단.
  • Choi, Y. J. (2014). Watching TV while catting online: The concept explication of “Social viewing”. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 28(4), 315-355.
    최윤정 (2014). TV 시청과 온라인 대화의 결합: 사회적 시청 개념 제시와 효과 검증. <한국방송학보>, 28권 4호, 315-355.
  • Choi, Y. J. (2018a). Effects of media orality and issue obtrusiveness on the level of social viewing: Focusing on online community and KakaoTalk discussions on the TV presidential debate in 2017. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 32(2), 134-173.
    최윤정 (2018a). 미디어의 구술성과 토론 주제의 돌출성이 사회적 시청의 수준에 미치는 영향: 2017년 TV 대선 토론에 대한 온라인 커뮤니티와 카카오톡 글 분석을 중심으로. <한국방송학보>, 32권 2호, 134-173.
  • Choi, Y. J. (2018b). Effects of cross-cutting exposure on opinion conformity, convergence, and reinforcement. Broadcasting & Communication, 19(1), 5-42.
    최윤정 (2018b). 사회적 시청에서 이견 노출이 의견의 동조, 강화, 절충에 미치는 영향. <방송과 커뮤니케이션>, 19권 1호, 5-42.
  • Choi, Y. J. (2018c). Effects of television program quality and openness on immersion, decoding and viewing satisfaction in social viewing context. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 32(6), 160-200.
    최윤정 (2018c). 사회적 시청에서 프로그램의 품질과 개방성이 몰입, 해독, 시청 만족에 미치는 영향. <한국방송학보>, 32권 6호, 160-200.
  • Choi, Y. J. (2018d). Effects of social viewing of presidential TV debates on candidate evaluation: An analysis of the path leading to candidate evaluation change through reaction to opponents. Korean Journal of Broadcasting & Telecommunications Research, 103, 216-250.
    최윤정 (2018d). 선거 토론에 대한 사회적 시청이 의견 변화에 미치는 영향: 의견 거리, 상대 의견에 대한 반응, 의견 변화로 이어지는 경로 분석. <방송통신연구>, 103호, 216-250.
  • Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591-621. [https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.142015]
  • Coles, S. M., & Saleem, M. (2021). Social media expression and user predispositions: Applying the differential susceptibility to media effects model to the study of issue polarization. Social Media+ Society, 7(4). [https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211052907]
  • Eom, K., & Park, J. (2024). The effects of cross-cutting exposure and critical viewing on attitudinal polarization in YouTube news uses: Testing for a dual mediation effect. Journal of Social Science, 50(1), 4-30.
    엄기영·박진우 (2024). 유튜브 뉴스 이용에서 이견노출과 비판적 시청이 태도 극화에 미치는 영향: 이중매개효과 검증을 중심으로. <사회과학연구>, 50권 1호, 4-30.
  • Eveland, W. P., Jr. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177-193. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490443877]
  • Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503620766]
  • Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(1), 298-320. [https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006]
  • Garrett, R. K., Gvirsman, S. D., Johnson, B. K., Tsfati, Y., Neo, R., & Dal, A. (2014). Implications of pro-and counterattitudinal information exposure or affective polarization. Human Communication Research, 40(3), 309-332. [https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12028]
  • Garrett, R. K., & Stroud, N. J. (2014). Partisan paths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro-and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 680-701. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12105]
  • Giglietto, F., & Selva, D. (2014). Second screen and participation: A content analysis on a full season dataset of tweets. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 260-277. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12085]
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H., Diehl, T., Huber, B., & Liu, J. (2017). Personality traits and social media use in 20 countries: How personality relates to frequency of social media use, social media news use, and social media use for social interaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(9), 540-552. [https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2017.0295]
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H., Garcia-Perdomo, V., & McGregor, S. C. (2015). What is second screening? Exploring motivations of second screen use and its effect on online political participation. Journal of Communication, 65(5), 793-815. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12174]
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3), 319-336. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x]
  • Gil de Zúñiga, H., Molyneux, L., & Zheng, P. (2014). Social media, political expression, and political participation: Panel analysis of lagged and concurrent relationships. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 612-634. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12103]
  • Gill, H. (2022). Testing the effect of cross-cutting exposure to cable TV news on affective polarization: Evidence from the 2020 US presidential election. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 66(2), 320-339. [https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2022.2087653]
  • Holbert, R. L., Weeks, B. E., & Esralew, S. (2013). Approaching the 2012 US presidential election from a diversity of explanatory principles: Understanding, consistency, and hedonism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(12), 1663-1687. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213490693]
  • Huckfeldt, R., Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2004). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25(1), 65-95. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00357.x]
  • Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 19-39. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x]
  • Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405-431. [https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfs038]
  • Jang, S., & Han, J. (2021). Does YouTube polarize its viewers? Analysis of the survey on subscribers to major political channels. Comtemporary Political Studies, 14(2), 5-35. [ https://doi.org/10.52594/jcp.2021.08.14.2.5 ]
    장승진·한정훈 (2021). 유튜브는 사용자들을 정치적으로 양극화시키는가? 주요 정치 및 시사 관련 유튜브 채널 구독자에 대한 설문조사 분석. <현대정치연구>, 14권 2호, 5-35.
  • Jang, Y. J., & Lee, E.-J. (2010). Effects of reading, writing, and opinion diversity in online discussion. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 54(2), 277-298.
    장윤재·이은주 (2010). 온라인 게 시판 토론에서 읽기, 쓰기, 그리고 의견 다양성의 효과. <한국언론학보>, 54권 2호, 277-298.
  • Jeong, D.-E., & Chung, S. (2019). How does the majority silence the minority? Tests of mediating effects of isolation fear and debate success expectancy. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 63(5), 190-229. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2019.63.5.006 ]
    정다은·정성은 (2019). 다수 의견은 소수 의견을 어떻게 침묵에 이르게 하는가? 고립에 대한 두려움과 논쟁에서의 성공 가능성의 매개효과 검증. <한국언론학보>, 63권 5호, 190-229.
  • Johnson, P. O., & Neyman, J. (1936). Tests of certain linear hypothesis and their application to some educational problems. Statistical Research Monories, 1, 57-93.
  • Johnson, T. J., Bichard, S. L., & Zhang, W. (2009). Communication communities or “cyberghettos?”: A path analysis model examining factors that explain selective exposure to blogs. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 60-82. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01492.x]
  • Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509-523. [https://doi.org/10.1086/268109]
  • Kim, J., Lee, Y. O., & Park, H. W. (2016). Delineating the complex use of a political podcast in South Korea by hybrid web indicators: The case of the Nakkomsu Twitter network. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 110, 42-50. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.012]
  • Kim, Y. (2015). Does disagreement mitigate polarization? How selective exposure and disagreement affect political polarization. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 92(4), 915-937. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699015596328]
  • Kim, Y. (2019). How cross-cutting news exposure relates to candidate issue stance knowledge, political polarization, and participation: The moderating role of political sophistication. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 31(4), 626-648. [https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edy032]
  • Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2009). Looking the other way: Selective exposure to attitude-consistent and counterattitudinal political information. Communication Research, 36(3), 426-448. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209333030]
  • Kubin, E., & von Sikorski, C. (2021). The role of (social) media in political polarization: A systematic review. Annals of the International Communication Association, 45(3), 188-206. [https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2021.1976070]
  • Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480-498. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480]
  • Kwak, N., Lane, D. S., Weeks, B. E., Kim, D. H., Lee, S. S., & Bachleda, S. (2018). Perceptions of social media for politics: Testing the slacktivism hypothesis. Human Communication Research, 44(2), 197-221. [https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqx008]
  • Lane, D. S., Lee, S. S., Liang, F., Kim, D. H., Shen, L., Weeks, B. E., & Kwak, N. (2019). Social media expression and the political self. Journal of Communication, 69(1), 49-72. [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy064]
  • Lee, E.-J. (2011). Perceived bias of biased perception? Effects of others’ comments, perceived opinion climate, and issue involvement on perceived news slant. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 55(3), 179-198.
    이은주 (2011). 지각된 편향인가 편향된 지각인가? 댓글의 내용, 여론에 대한 인식과 이슈 관여도에 따른 기사의 논조 지각. <한국언론학보>, 55권 3호, 179-198.
  • Lee, J., & Myers, T. A. (2016). Can social media change your mind? SNS use, cross-cutting exposure and discussion, and political view change. Social Media Studies, 2(2), 87-97.
  • Lee, N. Y., & Cho, Y. (2017). Partisan knowledge learning or partisan interpretations: The influence of partisan media usage on attitude polarization toward partisan issues. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 61(5), 204-240.
    이나연·조윤정 (2017). 지식 습득인가 정파적 해석인가: 정파적 미디어 이용이 정파적 이슈에 대한 태도 극화에 미치는 영향. <한국언론학보>, 61권 5호, 204-240.
  • Lee, S., & Cho, J. (2023). Communication mediation in an era of partisan selectivity: Modeling effects of information and discussion on participation. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 35, 1-12. [https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edad020]
  • Levendusky, M. S. (2013). Why do partisan media polarize viewers? American Journal of Political Science, 57(3), 611-623. [https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12008]
  • Levendusky, M. S. (2018). Americans, not partisans: Can priming American national identity reduce affective polarization?. The Journal of Politics, 80(1), 59-70. [https://doi.org/10.1086/693987]
  • Liang, H., & Zhang, X. (2021). Partisan bias of perceived incivility and its political consequences: Evidence from survey experiments in Hong Kong. Journal of Communication, 71(3), 357-379. [https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqab008]
  • Matthes, J., Rios Morrison, K., & Schemer, C. (2010). A spiral of silence for some: Attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Communication Research, 37(6), 774-800. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650210362685]
  • Min, Y. (2016). Citizens’ selective news use in an election: The causes and political consequences of partisan selectivity and news selectivity. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 60(2), 7-34. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2016.60.2.001 ]
    민영 (2016). 선택적 뉴스 이용: 정파적 선택성과 뉴스 선택성의 원인과 정치적 함의. <한국언론학보>, 60권 2호, 7-34.
  • Min, Y., Lee, H., Lee, H., & Kim, J., (2020). 2020 General election and Youtube. Korea Press Foundation.
    민영·이훈·이호영·김지원 (2020). <2020 총선과 유튜브>. 한국언론진흥재단.
  • Mutz, D. C. (2002). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(2), 838-855. [https://doi.org/10.2307/3088437]
  • Mutz, D. C., & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. American Political Science Review, 95(1), 97-114. [https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055401000223]
  • Ostman, J. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user-generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people. New Media & Society, 14(6), 1004-1021. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812438212]
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2012). Without you, I'm nothing: Performances of the self on Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 6, 1989-2006.
  • Pingree, R, J. (2007). How messages affect their senders: A more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory, 17(4), 439-461. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00306.x]
  • Robbins, I. P. (2013). What is the meaning of like: The first amendment implications of social media expression. Federal Courts Law Review, 7, 127-151.
  • Roh, S., & Min. Y. (2009). The coexistence of deliberation and participation: The moderating effects of deliberative political dialogue on the relationships between cross-cutting exposure and political participation. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 53(3), 173-197.
    노성종·민영 (2009). ‘숙의’와 ‘참여’의 공존: 대화의 숙의수준에 따른 정치적 이견의 경험과 정치참여의 관계 탐색. <한국언론학보>, 53권 3호, 173-197.
  • Scheufele, D. A., Hardy, B. W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I. S., & Nisbet, E. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 728-753. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.x]
  • Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., Brossard, D., & Nisbet, E. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21(3), 315-338. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490481389]
  • Shaffer, V. A., Bohanek, J., Focella, E. S., Horstman, H., & Saffran, L. (2019). Encouraging perspective taking: Using narrative writing to induce empathy for others engaging in negative health behaviors. PloS One, 14(10), e0224046. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224046]
  • Shah, D. V., Hanna, A., Bucy, E. P., Wells, C., & Quevedo, V. (2015). The power of television images in social media age: Linking biobehavioral and computational approaches via the second screen. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659, 225-245. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215569220]
  • Shah, D. V., McLeod, D. M., Rojas, H., Cho, J., Wagner, M. W., & Friedland, L. A. (2017). Revising the communication mediation model for a new political communication ecology. Human Communication Research, 43(4), 491-504. [https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12115]
  • Stroud, N. J. (2007). Media effects, selective exposure, and Fahrenheit 9/11. Political Communication, 24(4), 415-432. [https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600701641565]
  • Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 556-576. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.x]
  • Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. Oxford University Press. [https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199755509.001.0001]
  • Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0: Revenge of the blogs. Princeton University Press.
  • Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science, 50(3), 755-769. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x]
  • Trilling, D. (2015). Two different debates? Investigating the relationship between a political debate on TV and simultaneous comments on twitter. Social Science Computer Review, 33(3), 259-276. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314537886]
  • Vaccari, C., Chadwick, A., & O'Loughlin, B. (2015). Dual screening the political: Media events, social media, and citizen engagement. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 1041-1061. [https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12187]
  • Vaccari, C., & Valeriani, A. (2018). Dual screening, public service broadcasting, and political participation in eight western democracies. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 23(3), 367-388. [https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161218779170]
  • Vallone, R. P., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1985). The hostile media phenomenon: biased perception and perceptions of media bias in coverage of the Beirut massacre. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49(3), 577-585. [https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.49.3.577]
  • Warner, B. R., Horstman, H. K., & Kearney, C. C. (2020). Reducing political polarization through narrative writing. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 48(4), 459-477. [https://doi.org/10.1080/00909882.2020.1789195]
  • Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 704-718. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00364.x]
  • Yang, J. A. (2010). Indirect effects of mood on persuasino processes. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 54(1), 387-410.
    양정애 (2010). 피설득자의 기분이 설득에 미치는 간접적 영향. <한국언론학보>, 54권 1호, 387-410.
  • Yang, S., Lee, M., & Shin, J. (2019) Gender gap by news meida use and internet discussion efficacy and its effects to political participation on online. Communication Theories, 15(1), 57-90. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/ct.2019.15.1.057 ]
    양승찬·이미나·신지희 (2019). 뉴스미디어 이용과 인터넷 토론 효능감이 선거과정 온라인 정치 참여에 미치는 영향. <커뮤니케이션 이론>, 15권 1호, 57-90.
  • Yoo, S., Park, M., Kwak, E, & Kim, B. (2022). The possibilities and limitations of YouTube in the 2022 election. 2022 Presidential Election Media Watch Coalition.
    유승현·박만수·곽은아·김범준 (2022). <2022 대선에서 유튜브가 보여준 가능성과 한계>. 2022 대선미디어감시연대.
  • Yoon, S., Choi, J., & Sohn, D. (2021). Why we remain silent: Socio-psychological factors influencing different types of silence in social media. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication, 65(4), 148-184. [ https://doi.org/10.20879/kjjcs.2021.65.4.004 ]
    윤수진·최진호·손동영 (2021). 우리가 침묵하는 이유: 소셜미디어 여론에서 나타나는 침묵의 종류와 사회심리적 영향요인 연구. <한국언론학보>, 65권 4호, 148-184.