Skip to main content
Log in

Unspeaking on Facebook? Testing network effects on self-censorship of political expressions in social network sites

  • Published:
Quality & Quantity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study is to explore online social network exposure effects on predicting individual’s willingness to self-censor political expression (WTSC) and political posting behaviors. The spiral of silence (SOS) theory is applied to the context of online social networks wherein three major network characteristics are highlighted: reduced privacy, integration of multiple social context/relationships, and increase in unanticipated exposure to different opinions. The discussion leads us to propose three possible network effects in terms of WTSC and posting behavior including ‘relationship-specific fear of isolation’, ‘incongruence with dominant political orientation’, and ‘exposure to diverse opinions’. Results show that the exposure to diverse opinions is positively associated with WTSC, which in turn is associated with political posting behavior online. Interestingly, while fear of isolation from offline contacts increases WTSC, it has a positive association with actual posting behavior. We speculate to what extent the social conformity proposition of the SOS theory should persist online and call for further exploration of informational nfluence as conceptually distinct from normative influence.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The connotation of “anonymity” in this paper needs to be subtly differentiated from what Noelle-Neumann (1993) intends to mean when she used the terminology in her SOS theory. While we suggest that anonymity increases a sense of privacy by less exposing the individual’s identity to the public, Noelle-Neumann (1993) discusses that anonymity in public arena encourages to participants to overlook their individuality and is more likely to result in greater conformity with crowds. Her discussion seems to be in line with many early computer-mediated communication scholars’ discussion on online disinhibition effects, which takes a different view from more recent discussions on anonymity as a protector of privacy rights.

  2. While the zero-inflated poission (ZIP) model is one way to take account for overdispersion, Allen (2012) points out that the negative binomial model not only usually fits better than a ZIP model but also takes a much simpler approach to estimate and interpret. For more details, see Allen (2012). Logistic Regression Using SAS: Theory and Application (2nd Ed.).

References

  • Allen, P.: Logistic Regression Using SAS: Theory & Application, 2nd edn. SAS Institute (2012)

  • Barnett, G.A.: Communication and the evolution of SNS: cultural convergence perspective. J. Contemp. East. Asia 10, 43–54 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, W.L.: The uncivic culture: communication, identity, and the rise of lifestyle politics. PS. Polit. Sci. Polit. 31(4), 740–761 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brandtzaeg, P.B., Liders, M., Skjetne, J.H.: Too many Facebook “friends”? Content sharing and sociability versus the need for privacy in social network sites. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 26, 1006–1030 (2010). doi:10.1080/10447318.2010.516719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brundidge, J.: Encountering “difference” in the contemporary public sphere: the contribution of the Internet to the heterogeneity of political discussion networks. J. Commun. 60, 680–700 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J.S.: Social capital in the creation of human capital. Am. J. Sociol. 94, S95–S120 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cook, P., Heilmann, C.: Two types of self-censorship: public and private. Polit. Stud. 61, 178–196 (2013). doi:10.1111/j.1467-9248.2012.00957.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Das, S., Kramer, A.: Self-censorship on Facebook. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 793–802. Baltimore, MD Feb 15–19, (2013)

  • Donath, J.: Signals in social supernets. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 13(1), article 12 (2007). http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/donath.html

  • Eveland Jr, W.P., Hively, M.H.: Political discussion frequency, network size, and “heterogeneity” of discussion as predictors of political knowledge and participation. J. Commun. 59, 205–224 (2009). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01412.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Facebook’s Real Name Policy. Retrieved October 10, 2013 from https://www.facebook.com/help/292517374180078

  • Fadul, J.A.: Big data and knowledge generation in tertiary education in the Philippines. J. Contemp. East. Asia 13, 5–18 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garrett, R.K.: Echo chambers online? Politically motivated selective exposure among Internet news users1. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 14(2), 265–285 (2009)

  • Glynn, C.J., Hayes, A., Shanahan, J.: Perceived support for one’s opinions and willingness to speak out: a meta-analysis of survey studies on the “spiral of silence”. Public Opin. Q. 61, 452–463 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A.F., Glynn, C.J., Shanahan, J.: Willingness to self-censor: a construct and measurement tool for public opinion research. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 17(3), 298–323 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayes, A.F., Matthes, J., Eveland, W.P.: Stimulating the quasi-statistical organ: Fear of social isolation motivates the quest for knowledge of the opinion climate. Commun. Res. (2011) [Published online]. doi:10.1177/0093650211428608

  • Hindman, M.: The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, S.S., McLeod, D.M.: Social-psychological influences on opinion expression in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication. Commun. Res. 35, 190–207 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hsu, C., Park, S.J., Park, H.W.: Political discourse among key Twitter users: the case of Sejong city in South Korea. J. Contemp. East. Asia 12, 65–79 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M., Egelman, S., Bellovin, S.M.: Facebook and privacy: it’s complicated. In: Proceedings of the 8th Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security. ACM. Washington D.C., 11–13 July 2012

  • Kim, M., Park, H.W.: Measuring Twitter-based political participation and deliberation in the South Korean context by using social network and Triple Helix indicators. Scientometrics 90, 121–140 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y.: The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference: the relationships among SNSs, online political messaging, and exposure to cross-cutting perspectives. Comput. Hum. Behav. 27, 971–977 (2011). doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.12.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, S.-H.: Testing fear of isolation as a causal mechanism: spiral of silence and genetically modified (GM) foods in South Korea. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 24(3), 306–324 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., Hsu, S.-H., Gil de Zuniga, H.: Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: the moderating role of personality traits. J. Commun. 63(3), 498–516 (2013). doi:10.1111/jcom.12034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoke, D.: Networks of political action: towards theory construction. Soc. Forces 68, 1041–1063 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, K.H., Stefanone, M.A., Barnett, G.A.: Social network influence on online behavioral choices: exploring group formation on social network sites. Am. Behav. Sci. (2014). doi:10.1177/0002764214527092

  • Lange, P.G.: Publicly private and privately public: social networking on YouTube. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 13, 361–380 (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00400.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marwick, A.E., Boyd, D: I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media Soc. (2010). doi:10.1177/1461444810365313

  • Matthes, J., Morrison, K.R., Schemeer, C.: A spiral of silence for some: attitude certainty and the expression of political minority opinions. Commun. Res. 37, 774–800 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthes, J., Hayes, A.F., Rojas, H., Shen, F., Min, S.-J., Dylko, I.B.: Exemplifying a dispositional approach to cross-cultural spiral of silence research: fear of social isolation and the inclination to self-censor. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 24(3), 287–305 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., Cook, J.: Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27, 415–444 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D.C.: The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. Am. J. Polit. Sci. 46, 838–855 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutz, D.C.: Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative Versus Participatory Democracy. Cambridge University Press, New York (2006)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Neuwirth, K.: Testing the spiral of silence model: the case of Mexico. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 12(2), 138–159 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuwirth, K., Frederick, E., Mayo, C.: The spiral of silence and fear of isolation. J. Commun. 57, 450–468 (2007). doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00352.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noelle-Neumann, E.: The Spiral of Silence: Public Opinion—Our Social Skin, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Noelle-Neumann, E., Peterson, T.: The spiral of silence and the social nature of man. In: Kaid, L.L. (ed.) Handbook of Political Communication Research, pp. 339–356. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  • Otterbacher, J., Shapiro, M.A., Hemphill, L.: Interacting or just acting? A case study of European, Korean, and American politicians’ interactions with the public on Twitter. J. Contemp. East. Asia 12, 5–20 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papacharissi, Z.: The virtual geographies of social networks: a comparative analysis of Facebook, LinkedIn and A Small World. New Media Soc. 11, 199–220 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papacharissi, Z., Mendelson, A.: Toward a new(er) sociability: uses, gratifications, and social capital on Facebook. In: Papathanassopoulos, S. (ed.) Media Perspectives for the 21 Century, pp. 212–230. Routledge, New York, NY (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  • Park, H.W.: Mapping election campaigns through negative entropy: triple and Quadruple Helix approach to South Korea’s 2012 presidential election. Scientometrics 99, 187–197 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petric, G., Pinter, A.: From social perception to public expression of opinion: a structural equation modeling approach to the spiral of silence. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 14(1), 37–53 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project: Social networking sites and politics. Retrieved October 21, 2013, from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Social-networking-and-politics.aspx (2012)

  • Price, V., Allen, S.: Opinion spiral, silent and otherwise: applying small group research to public opinion phenomena1. Commun. Res. 17, 369–392 (1990). doi:10.1177/009365090017003005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rainie, L., Wellman, B.: Networked: The New Social Operating System. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Reiss, S.: Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: the theory of 16 basic desires. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 8, 179–193 (2004). doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.3.179

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salmon, C.T., Neuwirth, K.: Perceptions of opinion “climates” and willingness to discuss the issue of abortion. Journal. Q. 67, 567–577 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scheufele, D.A., Shanahan, J., Lee, E.: Real talk: manipulating the dependent variable in spiral of silence research. Commun. Res. 28, 304–324 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stroud, N.J.: Polarization and partisan selective exposure. J. Commun. 60, 556–576 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein, C.R.: Infotopia: How Many Minds Produce Knowledge. Oxford University, New York, NY (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  • Valenzuela, S., Kim, Y., Gil de Zuniga, H.: Social network that matter: exploring the role of political discussion for online political participation. Int. J. Public Opin. Res. 24(2), 163–184 (2012). doi:10.1093/ijpor/edr037

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yun, G.W., Park, S.-Y.: Selective posting: willingness to post a message online. J. Comput. Med. Commun. 16, 201–227 (2011). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wojcieszak, M.E., Mutz, D.C.: Online groups and political discourse: do online discussion spaces facilitate exposure to political disagreement? J. Commun. 59(1), 40–56 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are thankful to reviewers and the editor for constructive comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shin-Il Moon.

Additional information

The previous version of the current paper was presented at the ICA convention at Seattle, May 2014.

Appendix: Survey questionnaires

Appendix: Survey questionnaires

  1. 1.

    How frequently do you visit Facebook?

    1. (1)

      Never used Facebook

    2. (2)

      Once or twice a year

    3. (3)

      A few times a month or less

    4. (4)

      Weekly

    5. (5)

      Daily

    6. (6)

      More than once a day (but less than 5)

    7. (7)

      Five to 10 times a day

    8. (8)

      Too many times to count

  2. 2.

    How frequently do you update your status (or profile) on Facebook?

    1. (1)

      Never updated my status or profile

    2. (2)

      Once or twice a year.

    3. (3)

      A few times a month or less

    4. (4)

      Weekly

    5. (5)

      Daily

    6. (6)

      More than once a day

    7. (7)

      More than five times a day

    8. (8)

      Too many times to count

  3. 3.

    About how many friends do you have on Facebook ? (Open-ended)

  4. 4.

    FI as a personality trait (7-point scale)

    1. (1)

      It is scary to think about not being invited to social gatherings by people in my Facebook network

    2. (2)

      One of the worst things that could happen to me is to be excluded by people in my Facebook network

    3. (3)

      It would bother me if no one in my Facebook network wanted to be around me

    4. (4)

      I dislike feeling left out in Facebook

    5. (5)

      It is important to me to fit into the Facebook group I am with

  5. 5.

    Observation of Opinion Climate in Facebook (7-point scale)

    1. (1)

      I check out political news or video if they are updated from my Facebook newsfeed

    2. (2)

      I pay attention to political opinions/thoughts posted by others in my Facebook network

    3. (3)

      I pay attention to political activities that my Facebook friends posts

    4. (4)

      I read political discussion posts on Facebook if they are updated

  6. 6.

    FI from Multiplexed Social Networks: Imagine that you are interested in a recent controversial social issue (for examples, gun control, government surveillance, gay marriage, marijuana legalization, debt ceiling debate, universal health care, foreign policy over Syria, etc.). Youshared your opinion about the issue on your Facebook wall. Suppose that you discover that many of Facebook friends have an opposite standpoint to yours, including your family members, close friends, and even strangers. We want to know how you would feel if each of these kinds of Facebook friends, listed below (“a member of your immediate family”, “a member of your extended family”, “a coworker”, “your high school/college friends”, “your best friend”, “a friend of a friend”, “someone you’ve never met offline”, “someone you socialize offline”, “a stranger who is not in your Facebook friend network”), read your post about that controversial social issue and disagreed with you in a comment of their own.

    1. (1)

      For each kind of Facebook friend listed below, please indicate how comfortable you would be if they disagreed with you in a comment of their own (a 7 point scale)

    2. (2)

      For each kind of Facebook friend listed below, please indicate how concerned you would be about receiving disagreement comments (7-point scale)

  7. 7.

    WTSC: For each statement, please indicate your agreement based on 1–7 point scale. Don’t spend too much time on any one question. Simply record your first impression.

    1. (1)

      On Facebook, it is difficult for me to express my opinion if I think others won’t agree with what I post.

    2. (2)

      On Facebook, there have been many times when I have thought others in my social networks were wrong but I didn’t let them know.

    3. (3)

      On Facebook, when I disagree with others’ opinions, I’d rather go along with them than argue about it.

    4. (4)

      On Facebok, it is easy for me to express my opinion around others who I think will disagree with me (R)

    5. (5)

      On Facebook, I’d feel uncomfortable if someone asked my opinion and I knew that he or she wouldn’t agree with me.

    6. (6)

      On Facebook, I tend speak my opinion only around friends or other people I trust.

    7. (7)

      On Facebook, it is safer to keep quiet than publicly speak an opinion that you know most others don’t share.

    8. (8)

      On Facebook, if I disagree with others, I have no problem letting them know (R).

  8. 8.

    Political Expression Behaviors: During the past month, approximately how many politicrelated posts do you think you posted on Facebook? (e.g. news article, opinions, photos, videos, etc) (Open-ended)

  9. 9.

    Exposure Measures

    1. (1)

      What is your political orientation? (6-point scale)

    2. (2)

      Apart from your current political orientation, which political party do you believe the majority of your FB friends are leaning toward? (6-point scale)

    3. (3)

      Among these political posts on Facebook, which political party perspective was more strongly represented? (7point scale)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kwon, K.H., Moon, SI. & Stefanone, M.A. Unspeaking on Facebook? Testing network effects on self-censorship of political expressions in social network sites. Qual Quant 49, 1417–1435 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0078-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-014-0078-8

Keywords

Navigation