Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Can online communities be social capital? The effect of online communities on individuals’ political engagement

  • Published:
Current Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study used a political and social survey to examine the relationships among political efficacy, community activity, and political engagement in different generational cohorts in South Korea. A nationally representative sample of 777 Korean voters (age range: 20–59) was used for the analysis. We hypothesized that political efficacy is positively related to political engagement, both directly and indirectly, via mediating variables (i.e., both online and offline community activities). After we had controlled for gender, income, and educational level, the results revealed that the indirect effect of political efficacy on online political engagement via online community activities was significant for both the 20–30 age groups and the 30–40 age groups studied. For the 40–50 generation, offline community activities had a significant effect on offline political engagement. Political efficacy had a significant direct effect on online political engagement for both age groups.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Akamai (2016). State of the internet report. 9(4), 1–56. https://content.akamai.com/PG1183-StateoftheInternet.html

  • Bachmann, I., Kaufhold, K., Lewis, S. C., & de Zúñiga, H. G. (2010). News platform preference: Advancing the effects of age and media consumption on political participation. International Journal of Internet Science, 5(1), 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bachmann, I., Correa, T., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2012). Profiling online content creators: Advancing the paths to democracy. International Journal of E-Politics, 3(4), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348, 1130–1132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indices in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88(3), 588–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blais, A., & Dobrynska, A. (1998). Turnout in electoral democracies. European Journal of Political Research, 33(2), 239–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bode, L., Vraga, E. K., Borah, P., & Shah, D. V. (2014). A new space for political behavior: Political social networking and its democratic consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 414–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brady, H. E., Verba, S., & Schlozman, K. L. (1995). Beyond SES: A resource model of political participation. American Political Science Review, 89(2), 271–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chadwick, A. (2006). Internet politics: States, citizens, and new communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, S., & Kwon, J. (2015). Do online and offline relationship-maintaining behaviors promote bridging and bonding social capital?: Longitudinal analysis for the examination of causal relationship. Korean Journal of Social and Personality Psychology, 29(1), 107–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, 95–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, J. (1990). The foundations of social theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diamond, L. (1999). Developing democracy. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferri, P. (2012). Digital and inter-generational divide. In A. Cartelli (Ed.), Current trends and future practices for digital literacy and competence (pp. 1–18). London: Information Science Reference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flaherty, L. M., Pearce, K. J., & Rubin, R. B. (1998). Internet and face-to-face communication: Not functional alternatives. Communication Quarterly, 46(3), 250–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, J. (1996). How does civil society thicken?: The political construction of social capital in rural Mexico. World Development, 24(6), 1089–1103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama, F. (1995). Social capital and the global economy. Foreign Affairs, 74(5), 89–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grace-Farfaglia, P., Dekkers, A., Sundararajan, B., Peters, L., & Park, S. (2006). Multinational web uses and gratifications: Measuring the social impact of online community participation across national boundaries. Electronic Commerce Research, 6(1), 75–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, N. W. (2013). The influence of social media on political participation: Explicating the social media effect mechanism with normative, cognitive, attitudinal mediators. Journal of Institute for Social Sciences, 24(2), 273–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. (2006). A study on the blog as a media: Focused on media functions and the problems of the blog. Korea Media & Communication Studies, 50(2), 59–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, B. (2010). Study on the social relationship and social capital effect caused by blog use. Journal of Communication Science, 10, 73–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korea Information Society Development Institute. (2017a). Analysis on digital divide of old ages and its alternative. KISI Issue Report, 7, 1–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Korea Information Society Development Institute. (2017b). KISDI statistics report. Ministry of Science, ICT and future. Planning, 17, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaRose, R., Eastin, M. S., & Gregg, J. (2001). Reformulating the internet paradox: Social cognitive explanations of internet use and depression. Journal of Online Behavior, 1 available at http://www.behavior.net/JOB/v1n1/paradox.html.

  • Magsamen-Conrad, K., Billotte-Verhoff, C., & Greene, K. (2014). Technology addiction’s contribution to mental wellbeing: The positive effect of online social capital. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 23–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosquera, M. (2000). More than half of U.S. households now have Internet access. TechWeb News (http://www.techweb.com/wire/story/TWB200011218S0011).

  • Muthén, L., & Muthén, B. (2010). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oser, J., Hooghe, M., & Marien, S. (2013). Is online participation distinct from offline participation?: A latent class analysis of participation types and their stratification. Political Research Quarterly, 66(1), 91–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, K., & You, S. (2015). Media use preference: The mediating role of communication on political engagement. Journal of Pacific Rim Psychology, 9(2), 97–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paxton, P. (2002). Social capital and democracy: An interdependent relationship. American Sociological Review, 67(2), 254–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pew Research Center (2018). “Social Media Use in 2018” http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2018/03/01105133/PI_2018.03.01_Social-Media_FINAL.pdf

  • Putnam, R. D. (1994). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Putnam, R. D. (2002). Democracies in flux: The evolution of social capital in contemporary society. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and non-experimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Song, H. J. (2010). Internet engagement of 2030 generation and electronic government. Journal of Korean Association for Regional Information Society, 13(4), 97–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steiger, J. H. & Lind, J. M. (1980). Statistically based tests for the number of common factors. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Iowa City.

  • Tocqueville, A. D. (2002). Democracy in America. Washington: Regnery Publishing Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1972). Participation in America. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, B., Hasse, A. Q., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? The American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 436–455.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolfinger, R. E., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1980). Who votes? New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 704–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2924104).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, South Korea

    Kyungmee Park

  2. College of Education, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Imun-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, 130-791, South Korea

    Sukkyung You

Authors
  1. Kyungmee Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sukkyung You
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sukkyung You.

Ethics declarations

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee, as well as with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Park, K., You, S. Can online communities be social capital? The effect of online communities on individuals’ political engagement. Curr Psychol 40, 1752–1759 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0109-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0109-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation