Suchergebnisse

Most of the literature treats boycotting and buycotting -- which collectively comprise political consumerism -- as homogeneous acts, reflecting a single mode of behavior. However, several key differences between boycotts and buycotts suggest that the predictors of boycotting should be somewhat different from those of buycotting. In this article, I theorize that boycotting is more strongly associated with dutiful citizenship norms because it is punishment oriented and has several key features in common with electoral, interest-based politics. Buycotting, conversely, is more strongly associated with engaged citizenship norms because it is reward oriented and has more features in common with civic engagement. To test these theoretical expectations, I use original, nationally representative US survey data. The findings confirm my theoretical expectations, and they point to the role of changing citizenship norms rather than more traditional factors such as resources and psychological engagement as important in understanding contemporary political participation. Adapted from the source document.

Most of the literature treats boycotting and buycotting — which collectively comprise political consumerism — as homogeneous acts, reflecting a single mode of behavior. However, several key differences between boycotts and buycotts suggest that the predictors of boycotting should be somewhat different from those of buycotting. In this article, I theorize that boycotting is more strongly associated with dutiful citizenship norms because it is punishment oriented and has several key features in common with electoral, interest-based politics. Buycotting, conversely, is more strongly associated with engaged citizenship norms because it is reward oriented and has more features in common with civic engagement. To test these theoretical expectations, I use original, nationally representative US survey data. The findings confirm my theoretical expectations, and they point to the role of changing citizenship norms rather than more traditional factors such as resources and psychological engagement as important in understanding contemporary political participation.

Understanding how people engage in politics, and what motivates them to do so, has been an ongoing concern in the social science literature. Over the past decade, scholarly interest in boycotts and buycotts, which collectively comprise political consumerism—the deliberate purchase or avoidance of products for political or ethical reasons—has increased. However, these activities not been well conceptualized, and it is not clear what motivates people to engage in political consumerism. In this paper, I theorize that postmaterialist values increase the likelihood of engaging in political consumerism in the United States. To test this expectation, I use original, nationally representative U.S. survey data, and I find that postmaterialist values significantly increase the likelihood of engaging in political consumerism, while materialist values not, with controls in place for partisanship, ideology, and other democratic norms.

Political consumerism refers to the deliberate purchase or avoidance of products, goods, or services for political reasons. For decades, researchers have studied the micro-level predictors of political consumerism in many countries and across a variety of contexts. However, many questions remain. Do resource-based models of political participation or theories of lifestyle politics best explain why some people are more likely to engage in political consumerism? To answer this question, we conduct a meta-analysis of 66 studies with more than 1000 tests. We find more support for theories of lifestyle politics. Political consumerism is associated with political distrust, liberal ideology, and media use, as well as education, political interest, and organizational membership. The findings help us understand the subset of people who are using their purchasing power to express political opinions. They also help us identify gaps in existing research.

In an earlier study, we examined the relationship between digital media use and six acts of political participation in the United States between 1996 and 2008. We found that digital media use was associated with participation more broadly in 2008 than in preceding years and concluded with a question about whether the relationship between digital media use and behavior might be strengthening over time. Here we add 2012 data to address that question. The extended time series, from 1996 to 2012, reinforced our main findings: (1) the relationship between digital media use and behavior exhibits highly idiosyncratic variation over time; and (2) political talk constitutes an exception because of its consistent and positive relationship with seeking political information online. Adapted from the source document.

When digital media emerged in the early 1990s, many were hopeful that political parties would utilize the technology to mobilize disengaged voters. Instead, parties established websites that appealed to supporters. Did this change with the introduction of interactive media like social networking sites (SNS) in the Web 2.0 era? Using survey data from the 2009 German Longitudinal Election Study (GLES), we find that parties are able to reach beyond their base by disseminating campaign information through social networking sites. Unlike earlier studies, which found that parties tended to mobilize male party members who were older, wealthier, and more educated, we find that younger party members and non-members who strongly identify with political parties are more likely to see campaign information through social networking sites, regardless of their income, education, or gender. Moreover, party members are more likely than non-members to share campaign information on social media sites. Additional findings and implications are discussed.

Studies demonstrate that citizenship norms and media use are important predictors of political behavior. However, it remains unclear how norms and patterns of media use influence different modes of political participation—both directly and in tandem. Here, we leverage original US survey data ( N = 2200) to clarify how people's attitudes about what it means to be a "good citizen" inform how they participate in politics, and whether certain types of media use moderate these relationships. In contrast to previous studies, we find that actualizing norms are associated with electoral, non-electoral, and individualized modes of political participation, but dutiful norms are not. In addition, although digital and traditional media use have distinct relationships with participation, there is little moderating influence. Collectively, these findings raise questions about whether the boundaries between dutiful and actualizing norms—and electoral and non-electoral participation, respectively—are still relevant in the contemporary media environment.