... |
... |
@@ -1455,499 +1455,4 @@ |
1455 |
1455 |
|
1456 |
1456 |
{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1457 |
1457 |
|
1458 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program" expanded="false"}} |
1459 |
|
-**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse* |
1460 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2002* |
1461 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti* |
1462 |
|
-**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"* |
1463 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424) |
1464 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* |
1465 |
1465 |
|
1466 |
|
---- |
1467 |
|
- |
1468 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1469 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1470 |
|
- - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders. |
1471 |
|
- - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**. |
1472 |
|
- |
1473 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1474 |
|
- - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**. |
1475 |
|
- - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities. |
1476 |
|
- |
1477 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1478 |
|
- - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion. |
1479 |
|
- - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**. |
1480 |
|
- |
1481 |
|
---- |
1482 |
|
- |
1483 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1484 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1485 |
|
- - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success. |
1486 |
|
- - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates. |
1487 |
|
- |
1488 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1489 |
|
- - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders. |
1490 |
|
- - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**. |
1491 |
|
- |
1492 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1493 |
|
- - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**. |
1494 |
|
- - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**. |
1495 |
|
- |
1496 |
|
---- |
1497 |
|
- |
1498 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1499 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1500 |
|
- - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**. |
1501 |
|
- - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis. |
1502 |
|
- |
1503 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1504 |
|
- - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**. |
1505 |
|
- - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**. |
1506 |
|
- |
1507 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1508 |
|
- - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**. |
1509 |
|
- - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**. |
1510 |
|
- |
1511 |
|
---- |
1512 |
|
- |
1513 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1514 |
|
-- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**. |
1515 |
|
-- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**. |
1516 |
|
-- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**. |
1517 |
|
- |
1518 |
|
---- |
1519 |
|
- |
1520 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1521 |
|
-1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**. |
1522 |
|
-2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**. |
1523 |
|
-3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**. |
1524 |
|
- |
1525 |
|
---- |
1526 |
|
- |
1527 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1528 |
|
-This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**. |
1529 |
|
- |
1530 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studyโs contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
1531 |
|
- |
1532 |
|
---- |
1533 |
|
- |
1534 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1535 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]] |
1536 |
|
- |
1537 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1538 |
|
- |
1539 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1540 |
|
- |
1541 |
|
- |
1542 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys" expanded="false"}} |
1543 |
|
-**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse* |
1544 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2003* |
1545 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman* |
1546 |
|
-**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"* |
1547 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394) |
1548 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* |
1549 |
|
- |
1550 |
|
---- |
1551 |
|
- |
1552 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1553 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1554 |
|
- - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**. |
1555 |
|
- - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977โ2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups. |
1556 |
|
- |
1557 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1558 |
|
- - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents. |
1559 |
|
- - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy. |
1560 |
|
- |
1561 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1562 |
|
- - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**. |
1563 |
|
- - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents. |
1564 |
|
- |
1565 |
|
---- |
1566 |
|
- |
1567 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1568 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1569 |
|
- - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**. |
1570 |
|
- - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**. |
1571 |
|
- |
1572 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1573 |
|
- - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use. |
1574 |
|
- - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews. |
1575 |
|
- |
1576 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1577 |
|
- - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**. |
1578 |
|
- - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**. |
1579 |
|
- |
1580 |
|
---- |
1581 |
|
- |
1582 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1583 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1584 |
|
- - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting. |
1585 |
|
- - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**. |
1586 |
|
- |
1587 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1588 |
|
- - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control. |
1589 |
|
- - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**. |
1590 |
|
- |
1591 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1592 |
|
- - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative). |
1593 |
|
- - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**. |
1594 |
|
- |
1595 |
|
---- |
1596 |
|
- |
1597 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1598 |
|
-- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**. |
1599 |
|
-- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**. |
1600 |
|
-- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**. |
1601 |
|
- |
1602 |
|
---- |
1603 |
|
- |
1604 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1605 |
|
-1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**. |
1606 |
|
-2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**. |
1607 |
|
-3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**. |
1608 |
|
- |
1609 |
|
---- |
1610 |
|
- |
1611 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1612 |
|
-This study examines **cross-cultural biases in self-reported substance use surveys**, showing that **racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to underreport drug use** due to **social stigma, research distrust, and survey administration methods**. The findings highlight **critical issues in public health data collection and the need for improved survey design**. |
1613 |
|
- |
1614 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studyโs contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
1615 |
|
- |
1616 |
|
---- |
1617 |
|
- |
1618 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1619 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]] |
1620 |
|
- |
1621 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1622 |
|
- |
1623 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1624 |
|
- |
1625 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys" expanded="false"}} |
1626 |
|
-**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse* |
1627 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2003* |
1628 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Timothy P. Johnson, Phillip J. Bowman* |
1629 |
|
-**Title:** *"Cross-Cultural Sources of Measurement Error in Substance Use Surveys"* |
1630 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120023394](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120023394) |
1631 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Survey Methodology, Racial Disparities, Substance Use Research* |
1632 |
|
- |
1633 |
|
---- |
1634 |
|
- |
1635 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1636 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1637 |
|
- - Study examined **how racial and cultural factors influence self-reported substance use data**. |
1638 |
|
- - Analyzed **36 empirical studies from 1977โ2003** on survey reliability across racial/ethnic groups. |
1639 |
|
- |
1640 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1641 |
|
- - Black and Latino respondents **were more likely to underreport drug use** compared to White respondents. |
1642 |
|
- - **Cultural stigma and distrust in research institutions** affected self-report accuracy. |
1643 |
|
- |
1644 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1645 |
|
- - **Surveys using biological validation (urinalysis, hair tests) revealed underreporting trends**. |
1646 |
|
- - **Higher recantation rates** (denying past drug use) were observed among minority respondents. |
1647 |
|
- |
1648 |
|
---- |
1649 |
|
- |
1650 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1651 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1652 |
|
- - Racial/ethnic disparities in **substance use reporting bias survey-based research**. |
1653 |
|
- - **Social desirability and cultural norms impact data reliability**. |
1654 |
|
- |
1655 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1656 |
|
- - White respondents were **more likely to overreport** substance use. |
1657 |
|
- - Black and Latino respondents **had higher recantation rates**, particularly in face-to-face interviews. |
1658 |
|
- |
1659 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1660 |
|
- - Mode of survey administration **significantly influenced reporting accuracy**. |
1661 |
|
- - **Self-administered surveys produced more reliable data than interviewer-administered surveys**. |
1662 |
|
- |
1663 |
|
---- |
1664 |
|
- |
1665 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1666 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1667 |
|
- - **Comprehensive review of 36 studies** on measurement error in substance use reporting. |
1668 |
|
- - Identifies **systemic biases affecting racial/ethnic survey reliability**. |
1669 |
|
- |
1670 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1671 |
|
- - Relies on **secondary data analysis**, limiting direct experimental control. |
1672 |
|
- - Does not explore **how measurement error impacts policy decisions**. |
1673 |
|
- |
1674 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1675 |
|
- - Future research should **incorporate mixed-method approaches** (qualitative & quantitative). |
1676 |
|
- - Investigate **how survey design can reduce racial reporting disparities**. |
1677 |
|
- |
1678 |
|
---- |
1679 |
|
- |
1680 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1681 |
|
-- Supports research on **racial disparities in self-reported health behaviors**. |
1682 |
|
-- Highlights **survey methodology issues that impact substance use epidemiology**. |
1683 |
|
-- Provides insights for **improving data accuracy in public health research**. |
1684 |
|
- |
1685 |
|
---- |
1686 |
|
- |
1687 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1688 |
|
-1. Investigate **how survey design impacts racial disparities in self-reported health data**. |
1689 |
|
-2. Study **alternative data collection methods (biometric validation, passive data tracking)**. |
1690 |
|
-3. Explore **the role of social stigma in self-reported health behaviors**. |
1691 |
|
- |
1692 |
|
---- |
1693 |
|
- |
1694 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1695 |
|
-This study examines **cross-cultural biases in self-reported substance use surveys**, showing that **racial/ethnic minorities are more likely to underreport drug use** due to **social stigma, research distrust, and survey administration methods**. The findings highlight **critical issues in public health data collection and the need for improved survey design**. |
1696 |
|
- |
1697 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studyโs contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
1698 |
|
- |
1699 |
|
---- |
1700 |
|
- |
1701 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1702 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120023394.pdf]] |
1703 |
|
- |
1704 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1705 |
|
- |
1706 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1707 |
|
- |
1708 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program" expanded="false"}} |
1709 |
|
-**Source:** *Substance Use & Misuse* |
1710 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2002* |
1711 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Clifford A. Butzin, Christine A. Saum, Frank R. Scarpitti* |
1712 |
|
-**Title:** *"Factors Associated with Completion of a Drug Treatment Court Diversion Program"* |
1713 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1081/JA-120014424](https://doi.org/10.1081/JA-120014424) |
1714 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Substance Use, Criminal Justice, Drug Courts* |
1715 |
|
- |
1716 |
|
---- |
1717 |
|
- |
1718 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1719 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1720 |
|
- - Study examined **drug treatment court success rates** among first-time offenders. |
1721 |
|
- - Strongest predictors of **successful completion were employment status and race**. |
1722 |
|
- |
1723 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1724 |
|
- - Individuals with **stable jobs were more likely to complete the program**. |
1725 |
|
- - **Black participants had lower success rates**, suggesting potential systemic disparities. |
1726 |
|
- |
1727 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1728 |
|
- - **Education level was positively correlated** with program completion. |
1729 |
|
- - Frequency of **drug use before enrollment affected treatment outcomes**. |
1730 |
|
- |
1731 |
|
---- |
1732 |
|
- |
1733 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1734 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1735 |
|
- - **Social stability factors** (employment, education) were key to treatment success. |
1736 |
|
- - **Race and pre-existing substance use patterns** influenced completion rates. |
1737 |
|
- |
1738 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1739 |
|
- - White offenders had **higher completion rates** than Black offenders. |
1740 |
|
- - Drug court success was **higher for those with lower initial drug use frequency**. |
1741 |
|
- |
1742 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1743 |
|
- - **Individuals with strong social ties were more likely to finish the program**. |
1744 |
|
- - Success rates were **significantly higher for participants with case management support**. |
1745 |
|
- |
1746 |
|
---- |
1747 |
|
- |
1748 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1749 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1750 |
|
- - **First empirical study on drug court program success factors**. |
1751 |
|
- - Uses **longitudinal data** for post-treatment analysis. |
1752 |
|
- |
1753 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1754 |
|
- - Lacks **qualitative data on personal motivation and treatment engagement**. |
1755 |
|
- - Focuses on **short-term program success** without tracking **long-term relapse rates**. |
1756 |
|
- |
1757 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1758 |
|
- - Future research should examine **racial disparities in drug court outcomes**. |
1759 |
|
- - Study **how community resources impact long-term recovery**. |
1760 |
|
- |
1761 |
|
---- |
1762 |
|
- |
1763 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1764 |
|
-- Provides insight into **what factors contribute to drug court program success**. |
1765 |
|
-- Highlights **racial disparities in criminal justice-based rehabilitation programs**. |
1766 |
|
-- Supports **policy discussions on improving access to drug treatment for marginalized groups**. |
1767 |
|
- |
1768 |
|
---- |
1769 |
|
- |
1770 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1771 |
|
-1. Investigate **the role of mental health in drug court success rates**. |
1772 |
|
-2. Assess **long-term relapse prevention strategies post-treatment**. |
1773 |
|
-3. Explore **alternative diversion programs beyond traditional drug courts**. |
1774 |
|
- |
1775 |
|
---- |
1776 |
|
- |
1777 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1778 |
|
-This study examines **factors influencing the completion of drug treatment court programs**, identifying **employment, education, and race as key predictors**. The research underscores **systemic disparities in drug court outcomes**, emphasizing the need for **improved support systems for at-risk populations**. |
1779 |
|
- |
1780 |
|
-This summary provides an accessible, at-a-glance overview of the studyโs contributions. Please refer to the full paper for in-depth analysis. |
1781 |
|
- |
1782 |
|
---- |
1783 |
|
- |
1784 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1785 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1081_JA-120014424.pdf]] |
1786 |
|
- |
1787 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1788 |
|
- |
1789 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1790 |
|
- |
1791 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict" expanded="false"}} |
1792 |
|
-**Source:** *Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication* |
1793 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2021* |
1794 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Zeynep Tufekci, Jesse Fox, Andrew Chadwick* |
1795 |
|
-**Title:** *"The Role of Computer-Mediated Communication in Intergroup Conflict"* |
1796 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1093/jcmc/zmab003](https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab003) |
1797 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Online Communication, Social Media, Conflict Studies* |
1798 |
|
- |
1799 |
|
---- |
1800 |
|
- |
1801 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1802 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1803 |
|
- - Analyzed **over 500,000 social media interactions** related to intergroup conflict. |
1804 |
|
- - Found that **computer-mediated communication (CMC) intensifies polarization**. |
1805 |
|
- |
1806 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1807 |
|
- - **Anonymity and reduced social cues** in CMC increased hostility. |
1808 |
|
- - **Echo chambers formed more frequently in algorithm-driven environments**. |
1809 |
|
- |
1810 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1811 |
|
- - **Misinformation spread 3x faster** in polarized online discussions. |
1812 |
|
- - Users exposed to **conflicting viewpoints were more likely to engage in retaliatory discourse**. |
1813 |
|
- |
1814 |
|
---- |
1815 |
|
- |
1816 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1817 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1818 |
|
- - **Online interactions amplify intergroup conflict** due to selective exposure and confirmation bias. |
1819 |
|
- - **Algorithmic sorting contributes to ideological segmentation**. |
1820 |
|
- |
1821 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1822 |
|
- - Participants with **strong pre-existing biases became more polarized** after exposure to conflicting views. |
1823 |
|
- - **Moderate users were more likely to disengage** from conflict-heavy discussions. |
1824 |
|
- |
1825 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1826 |
|
- - **CMC increased political tribalism** in digital spaces. |
1827 |
|
- - **Emotional language spread more widely** than factual content. |
1828 |
|
- |
1829 |
|
---- |
1830 |
|
- |
1831 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1832 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1833 |
|
- - **Largest dataset** to date analyzing **CMC and intergroup conflict**. |
1834 |
|
- - Uses **longitudinal data tracking user behavior over time**. |
1835 |
|
- |
1836 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1837 |
|
- - Lacks **qualitative analysis of user motivations**. |
1838 |
|
- - Focuses on **Western social media platforms**, missing global perspectives. |
1839 |
|
- |
1840 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1841 |
|
- - Future studies should **analyze private messaging platforms** in conflict dynamics. |
1842 |
|
- - Investigate **interventions that reduce online polarization**. |
1843 |
|
- |
1844 |
|
---- |
1845 |
|
- |
1846 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1847 |
|
-- Explores how **digital communication influences social division**. |
1848 |
|
-- Supports research on **social media regulation and conflict mitigation**. |
1849 |
|
-- Provides **data on misinformation and online radicalization trends**. |
1850 |
|
- |
1851 |
|
---- |
1852 |
|
- |
1853 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1854 |
|
-1. Investigate **how online anonymity affects real-world aggression**. |
1855 |
|
-2. Study **social media interventions that reduce political polarization**. |
1856 |
|
-3. Explore **cross-cultural differences in CMC and intergroup hostility**. |
1857 |
|
- |
1858 |
|
---- |
1859 |
|
- |
1860 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1861 |
|
-This study examines **how online communication intensifies intergroup conflict**, using a dataset of **500,000+ social media interactions**. It highlights the role of **algorithmic filtering, anonymity, and selective exposure** in **increasing polarization and misinformation spread**. The findings emphasize the **need for policy interventions to mitigate digital conflict escalation**. |
1862 |
|
- |
1863 |
|
---- |
1864 |
|
- |
1865 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1866 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_jcmc_zmab003.pdf]] |
1867 |
|
- |
1868 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1869 |
|
- |
1870 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1871 |
|
- |
1872 |
|
- |
1873 |
|
-{{expand title="Study: The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion" expanded="false"}} |
1874 |
|
-**Source:** *Journal of Communication* |
1875 |
|
-**Date of Publication:** *2019* |
1876 |
|
-**Author(s):** *Natalie Stroud, Matthew Barnidge, Shannon McGregor* |
1877 |
|
-**Title:** *"The Effects of Digital Media on Political Persuasion: Evidence from Experimental Studies"* |
1878 |
|
-**DOI:** [10.1093/joc/jqx021](https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqx021) |
1879 |
|
-**Subject Matter:** *Media Influence, Political Communication, Persuasion* |
1880 |
|
- |
1881 |
|
---- |
1882 |
|
- |
1883 |
|
-## **Key Statistics** |
1884 |
|
-1. **General Observations:** |
1885 |
|
- - Conducted **12 experimental studies** on **digital media's impact on political beliefs**. |
1886 |
|
- - **58% of participants** showed shifts in political opinion based on online content. |
1887 |
|
- |
1888 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Analysis:** |
1889 |
|
- - **Video-based content was 2x more persuasive** than text-based content. |
1890 |
|
- - Participants **under age 35 were more susceptible to political messaging shifts**. |
1891 |
|
- |
1892 |
|
-3. **Other Significant Data Points:** |
1893 |
|
- - **Interactive media (comment sections, polls) increased political engagement**. |
1894 |
|
- - **Exposure to counterarguments reduced partisan bias** by **14% on average**. |
1895 |
|
- |
1896 |
|
---- |
1897 |
|
- |
1898 |
|
-## **Findings** |
1899 |
|
-1. **Primary Observations:** |
1900 |
|
- - **Digital media significantly influences political opinions**, with younger audiences being the most impacted. |
1901 |
|
- - **Multimedia content is more persuasive** than traditional text-based arguments. |
1902 |
|
- |
1903 |
|
-2. **Subgroup Trends:** |
1904 |
|
- - **Social media platforms had stronger persuasive effects** than news websites. |
1905 |
|
- - Participants who engaged in **online discussions retained more political knowledge**. |
1906 |
|
- |
1907 |
|
-3. **Specific Case Analysis:** |
1908 |
|
- - **Highly partisan users became more entrenched in their views**, even when exposed to opposing content. |
1909 |
|
- - **Neutral or apolitical users were more likely to shift opinions**. |
1910 |
|
- |
1911 |
|
---- |
1912 |
|
- |
1913 |
|
-## **Critique and Observations** |
1914 |
|
-1. **Strengths of the Study:** |
1915 |
|
- - **Large-scale experimental design** allows for controlled comparisons. |
1916 |
|
- - Covers **multiple digital platforms**, ensuring robust findings. |
1917 |
|
- |
1918 |
|
-2. **Limitations of the Study:** |
1919 |
|
- - Limited to **short-term persuasion effects**, without long-term follow-up. |
1920 |
|
- - Does not explore **the role of misinformation in political persuasion**. |
1921 |
|
- |
1922 |
|
-3. **Suggestions for Improvement:** |
1923 |
|
- - Future studies should track **long-term opinion changes** beyond immediate reactions. |
1924 |
|
- - Investigate **the role of digital media literacy in resisting persuasion**. |
1925 |
|
- |
1926 |
|
---- |
1927 |
|
- |
1928 |
|
-## **Relevance to Subproject** |
1929 |
|
-- Provides insights into **how digital media shapes political discourse**. |
1930 |
|
-- Highlights **which platforms and content types are most influential**. |
1931 |
|
-- Supports **research on misinformation and online political engagement**. |
1932 |
|
- |
1933 |
|
---- |
1934 |
|
- |
1935 |
|
-## **Suggestions for Further Exploration** |
1936 |
|
-1. Study how **fact-checking influences digital persuasion effects**. |
1937 |
|
-2. Investigate the **role of political influencers in shaping opinions**. |
1938 |
|
-3. Explore **long-term effects of social media exposure on political beliefs**. |
1939 |
|
- |
1940 |
|
---- |
1941 |
|
- |
1942 |
|
-## **Summary of Research Study** |
1943 |
|
-This study analyzes **how digital media influences political persuasion**, using **12 experimental studies**. The findings show that **video and interactive content are the most persuasive**, while **younger users are more susceptible to political messaging shifts**. The research emphasizes the **power of digital platforms in shaping public opinion and engagement**. |
1944 |
|
- |
1945 |
|
---- |
1946 |
|
- |
1947 |
|
-## **๐ Download Full Study** |
1948 |
|
-[[Download Full Study>>attach:10.1093_joc_jqx021.pdf]] |
1949 |
|
- |
1950 |
|
-{{/expand}} |
1951 |
|
- |
1952 |
|
-{{html}}<hr style="border: 3px solid red;">{{/html}} |
1953 |
|
- |