TY - JOUR
AU - Yamamoto,, Masahiro
AB - Abstract This study integrates communication mediation, communication and social capital, and communication infrastructure to investigate how locality-oriented communication activities, including media use and interpersonal communication, are associated with citizen journalism practice conceived as a form of civic participation. To test an integrative model, we collected data through a web survey of a U.S. national online panel (N = 1,201). Results reveal that local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion were associated with citizen journalism participation both directly and indirectly through organizational membership and neighborhood belonging. Results also show that local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion were linked with citizen journalism participation through organizational membership and neighborhood belonging, respectively, and collective efficacy in serial. These results entail theoretical, practical, and policy implications. An accumulated body of research on communication and citizenship indicates that communication, including media use and interpersonal discussion, drives citizens to engage in civic and political activities. Three theoretical perspectives are particularly helpful in understanding the role of communication in this process: the communication mediation model (e.g., McLeod, Scheufele, & Moy, 1999; Shah, Cho, Eveland, & Kwak, 2005; Shah et al., 2007), communication and social capital approach (e.g., Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004, 2006; Shah, Kwak, & Holbert, 2001), and communication infrastructure theory (CIT) (e.g., Ball-Rokeach, Kim, & Matei, 2001; Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b). While these perspectives have distinct theoretical components, they underscore the role of interpersonal discussion and media use in fostering civic participation to build a vibrant civic community. The present study conceptualizes citizen journalism practice as a form of civic participation by which citizens actively engage in the news production processes and contribute to conversations in multiple public spheres, such as posting comments, uploading photos and videos, and contributing news stories to news outlets on professional and/or citizen news sites (Friedland & Kim, 2009; Nah, Yamamoto, Chung, & Zuercher, 2015). Building on the three theoretical perspectives, we develop an integrative model to explain what drives citizens to engage in citizen journalism practice as a new form of civic participation with a focus on locality-based media use and interpersonal discussion. To test a theorized model linking locality-based communication with citizen journalism participation, we analyze data collected through a web survey of a U.S. national online panel. The present study is situated in the rich body of research on communication, citizen journalism, and citizenship, where citizens increasingly participate in journalism practice on mainstream and alternative news sites for community building and social change. Findings will offer useful theoretical, practical, and policy insights into why and under what conditions citizens engage in journalistic practice. Communication mediation model A substantial body of scholarship indicates that communication, especially news consumption and interpersonal political discussion, helps foster political and civic acts (e.g., McLeod, Kosicki, & McLeod, 2002; McLeod et al., 1999; Shah et al., 2005, 2007). Based on an O-S-O-R model (Markus & Zajonc, 1985), McLeod et al. have investigated how demographic and community characteristics (O1) orient individuals to engage in communication activities (S) such as media use and public conversation. Exposure to communication stimuli then leads to social and psychological outcomes (O2), such as political knowledge and efficacy, resulting finally in behavioral responses (R) (e.g., McLeod et al., 1999, 2002). Of particular note is that this so-called communication mediation model investigates underlying processes by which antecedent variables affect communication activities and then communication influences behavioral engagement through mediating mechanisms. Previous studies have applied the communication mediation model in varied contexts (McLeod et al., 2002; Shah et al., 2005, 2007). For example, Shah et al. (2005) showed that online information seeking and hard news consumption through newspapers and television were positively associated with civic participation through interpersonal political discussion and online civic messaging. In a different setting, Shah et al. (2007) found that exposure to political advertisements predicted campaign participation indirectly through a wide range of online and offline communication activities, including media use and political discussion. Research in this area has extended the communication mediation model in two major ways. First, previous studies have added a broad range of media uses through print, broadcasting, and the Internet, and offline and online political discussion (e.g., Shah et al., 2001, 2005, 2007). Second, previous work has consistently found that communication, both media use and interpersonal discussion, not only exerts direct effects on civic outcomes but also has indirect effects on civic outcomes through mediating mechanisms (e.g., Shah et al., 2005, 2007). In sum, this tradition of political communication research has advanced a nuanced understanding of the civic role of news media use and interpersonal political discussion, yielding communication-centered pathways, both direct and indirect, to civic engagement (McLeod et al., 1999, 2002). Communication and social capital A rich body of work has examined the role of communication in social capital (e.g., Beaudoin, 2011; Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004, 2006; Shah et al., 2001). While Putnam (1995, 2000) popularized the notion of social capital, its origin and definition can be traced back to Bourdieu, Coleman, and Loury, among others (Portes, 1998). Bourdieu’s definition of social capital refers to “the aggregate of the actual or potential resources which are linked to possession of a durable network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” and “the profits which accrue from membership in a group are the basis of the solidarity which makes them possible” (Bourdieu, 1986, pp. 248–249). Coleman (1988) defines social capital in terms of its function, indicating that it is “not a single entity but a variety of different entities, with two elements in common: they all consist of some aspect of social structures, and they facilitate certain action of actors within the structure” (p. S98). Bourdieu and Coleman emphasize the importance of strong ties to explain the relationship between social structure and social actors. Putnam defines social capital as “features of social organizations such as networks, norms, and social trust that facilitate coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit” (Putnam, 1995, p.67). In comparison with Bourdieu and Coleman’s definitions of social capital, Putnam’s definition includes loose social ties through informal social gatherings and associations. Relying on the works of Putnam and Coleman, communication scholars have used various indicators to measure social capital such as neighborliness, organizational membership, sociability, public attendance, and civic engagement (Kikuchi & Coleman, 2012). For instance, using social trust, contentment, and civic engagement as indicators of social capital, Shah et al. (2001) assessed the association between traditional and online media use and social capital. Overall, studies have shown that mass media use, especially hard news consumption, is positively related to indicators of social capital such as neighborliness, social networks, and social trust (Beaudoin, 2009; Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004, 2006; Shah et al., 2001). Although some studies have used civic engagement as an indicator of social capital, Paxton (1999) contended that it is more purposeful action that results from social capital, or resources derived from formal and informal social activities such as organizational membership and informal socialization. Indeed, Beaudoin and Thorson (2004) found that newspaper use and local TV hard news use were positively related to social networks, such as neighborliness and organizational membership, which, in turn, predicted volunteering and voting as outcomes of social capital. Taken together, although the conceptual definition of social capital varies across studies, social capital is conceived as a multifaceted, multidimensional, and multilevel concept. It encompasses trust, norms, and social networks among individuals, groups, organizations, and institutions. These multiple aspects of social capital can function as useful resources, which may contribute to civic engagement. Communication infrastructure theory According to CIT (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b), communication infrastructure refers to a community storytelling network situated in a locality-based communication action context. Communication infrastructure functions as an essential asset for civic action to occur in local communities. A burgeoning body of scholarship examines how a community storytelling network, constituted by the interplay among local media, community organizations, and residents, facilitates civic action and citizenship (Chen, Dong, Ball-Rokeach, Parks, & Huang, 2012; Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b; Ognyanova et al., 2013). CIT conceptualizes civic engagement as a multifaceted and multidimensional concept represented by civic participation, neighborhood belonging, and collective efficacy (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b). While neighborhood belonging refers to residents’ feelings of attachment to their communities and interactions with other residents, collective efficacy indicates the perceived willingness of residents to address community issues and problems in order to achieve common goals. Civic participation as an outcome of neighborhood belonging and collective efficacy relates directly to residents’ participation in decision-making and problem-solving processes and outcomes. CIT scholarship further explains community storytelling network at multiple levels (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b). First, community residents at the micro-level serve as storytelling agents by exchanging and sharing community resources, news and information, and a common culture through social interaction. Second, community organizations at the meso-level nurture a civic culture by mobilizing community residents to collaborate toward common goals. Third, media organizations at the meso and macro levels foster civic engagement by conveying news and information, connecting community residents and community organizations, and creating a public sphere for discussions to occur in local communities. Community storytelling agents at each level, consequently, contribute to civic engagement: e.g., enhanced community belonging and participation through micro-level storytelling networks (Chen et al., 2012; Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b), increased neighborhood belonging because of affiliation with community organizations (Ball-Rokeach et al., 2001), enhanced neighborhood belonging (Ball-Rokeach et al., 2001), offline civic participation (Chen et al., 2012; Shah et al., 2005), and online civic participation (Ognyanova et al., 2013) through connections to local news media, public opinion formation through shared news and information and public deliberation (Habermas, 1962/1989; Katz & Lazarsfeld, 1955) by connection to mainstream news media. While the three storytelling agents play a distinct role in the CIT framework, they also stimulate each other to constitute a storytelling network. For instance, connection to community residents should not only facilitate public discussion but also motivate residents to further seek news and information concerning community affairs through connection to news media as well as community organizations. In this regard, CIT defines integrated connectedness to a community storytelling network (ICSN) as the extent to which community residents are connected in the community storytelling network through an integrated system to the three storytelling agents (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b). CIT scholarship finds that a higher level of ICSN leads to a higher level of neighborhood belonging, collective efficacy, and civic participation (e.g., Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a). Citizen journalism practice as a form of civic participation The definition of citizen journalism in this study is rooted in Habermas’s (1962/1989) notion of the public sphere. The public sphere, in its original form, refers to a mediating realm between civil society and the state where citizens strive to accomplish their common goals through reason-based public discussions. In order for a large public body to participate in civic communication, it requires “specific [technological] means for transmitting information and influencing those who receive it. Today, newspapers, magazine, radio, and television are the media of the public sphere” (Habermas, 1974, p. 49). Habermas’s definition of the bourgeois public sphere has been widely expanded over the decades, as the public sphere itself faced social, political, cultural, and technological transformations. On the one hand, scholars have challenged his notion of the public sphere as being singular, patriarchal, ethnocentric, and rationality-based (e.g., Asen & Brower, 2001; Eley, 1992; Fraser, 1992; Garnham, 1992). These scholars argue that public and civic communication should also pay attention to multiple, alternative, and counterpublic spheres that stem from marginalized and underrepresented groups, such as women, labor workers, indigenous peoples, and culturally, discursively diverse groups, among others. On the other hand, scholars in communication fields have advanced the multiplicity of the public sphere beyond face-to-face communication, embracing not only traditional mass media but also newly emerging digital technologies (Dahlgren, 2005; Friedland, Hove, & Rojas, 2006; Palczewski, 2001). For instance, the Internet may function as a public sphere for citizens to discuss current issues and events and to solve common problems through rational discussion and mutual understanding. In particular, websites interconnected through online networks enable citizens to exchange and discuss information and news that might not be available elsewhere and thus serve as unique public spheres in their own right (Dahlgren, 2005; Friedland et al., 2006). The Internet may also offer contested arenas wherein citizens form counterpublics to participate in not only state-centered political activities (mainstream public spheres) but also culture-driven, oppositional, and discursive actions (alternative public spheres) (Palczewski, 2001). In this regard, the conceptual definition of citizen journalism relates closely to the multiplicity of the public sphere unlike its original definition (Habermas, 1974, 1962/1989). As Dahlgren states (2005), “multisector online public spheres” (p. 153) in cyberspace concern a wide array of public, contested, and participatory arenas, such as the governmental sector and the civil society (e.g., advocacy and activist groups). That is, not only mainstream but also alternative news sites in the journalistic field play central roles as online public spheres through which a burgeoning body of citizens practice citizen, participatory, alternative, and community journalism in local and global communities (e.g., Allan, 2006; Atton, 2003; Downing, 2003; Farinosi & Treré, 2014; Lim, 2012; Rodríguez; 2001; Roth & Valaskakis, 1989). Citizens contribute to not only professional news sites as mainstream public spheres, but also citizen news sites as alternative public spheres where they represent voices that are marginalized, underserved, and underrepresented by the mainstream journalism. The coexistence of the different natures of public spheres presents opportunities for more diverse, multicultural, and democratic journalism for citizenship and social change (Atton, 2003; Downing, 2003; Rodríguez, 2001; Roth & Valaskakis, 1989). Citizen journalism defined in this way is considered an integral component of civic participation. This participation refers to citizens’ individual and collective efforts to solve common problems (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006a, 2006b; McLeod et al., 1996; Putnam, 2000). In a broad sense, civic participation includes not only conventional political acts (e.g., voting, signing petitions for candidates, contacting public officials, etc.), but also a wide array of civic activities (e.g., attending protests, rallies, boycotts or marches, working on behalf of local social groups or causes, etc.). Specific examples of citizen journalism as a form of civic participation include contacting news media organizations, such as local newspapers, television stations, or radio stations, participating in online forums (Dahlberg, 2001), emailing news editors, or sharing content to express opinions on social or political issues (Kahne, Lee, & Feezell, 2012). In this regard, making comments, uploading photos and videos, and submitting stories on mainstream and alternative news sites indicate civic and participatory activities contributing to varied online public spheres. These types of citizen journalism practice are manifest in Friedland and Kim’s (2009) notion of citizen journalism as a “contribution to discussion in the public sphere, whether in the form of simple information, synthesis, reporting, or opinion” (p. 297). According to Friedland and Kim (2009), citizen journalists by definition “can be individuals making a single contribution (a fact, correction, photo, etc.), bloggers, or professionals editing citizen content for ‘professional-amateur’ (pro-am) sites which integrate the works of professional staff and citizen contributors” (p. 297). Hence, citizens can engage in journalistic practices on their own, or may participate jointly with professional journalists in news-making processes where citizen contributors check facts, correct errors, and update content that professional journalists may have missed. Indeed, these activities are conceived as primary layers of a wide variety of citizen journalism practices (Outing, 2005). Furthermore, citizens can help professional journalists collect, report, and disseminate information and content by not only submitting their own news stories, but also uploading photos and videos, providing first-hand accounts of breaking events, and contributing to the conversation of democracy on the public spheres and citizen participation in public life (Farinosi & Treré, 2014; Forde, Foxwell, & Meadows, 2003). Prior research reports that these journalistic activities are commonly practiced by citizen contributors and adopted by news media organizations (e.g., Nah et al., 2015). Thus, the present study defines citizen journalism and citizen journalists broadly as contributing to the public sphere through various types of content, including comments, photos/videos, and news stories and a vast array of communication practices (Chung, Nah, & Yamamoto, 2017; Fico et al., 2013; Lacy, Duffy, Riffe, Thorson & Fleming, 2010; Nah et al., 2015). With this conceptual guidance in place, we approach citizen journalism as a form of civic participation with two sets of contributions to public spheres: (a) citizen contributions (citizen response) to mainstream and professional news sites; and (b) citizen contributions (citizen production) on alternative and citizen news sites. On the one hand, citizens as nonprofessionals produce “news content” (e.g., text, video, audio, interactives, etc.) on professional news sites (Wall, 2015, p. 2), although they submit their own stories or stories written together with professional journalists (Nah et al., 2015). In this process, while citizen contributions on professional and mainstream news sites may challenge the “professional logic of control” (Lewis, 2012, p. 839) of mainstream news, citizen journalism may limit citizen contributors’ capabilities of destabilizing journalists’ professional control over gatekeeping and framing (Lewis, 2012; Nah et al., 2015). On the other hand, citizen journalists on citizen and alternative news sites are responsible for “gathering content, visioning, producing, and publishing the news product” (Nip, 2006, p. 218). In this process, citizen contributions on citizen and alternative news sites enables them to have control over content and independently frame news stories on their own. Therefore, our conceptual and operational definition of citizen journalism as a form of civic participation concerns a wide array of multiple public spheres with a special emphasis on the two forms of citizen journalism practice—not merely citizen response on professional and mainstream news sites, but also citizen production on citizen and alternative news sites (Allan, 2006; Atton, 2003; Downing, 2003; Lim, 2012). Theorized model: communication and citizen journalism participation The three theoretical perspectives reviewed above are distinct, yet they share a focus on the role of communication in developing civically engaged citizens. Given this commonality, this study integrates these perspectives and proposes a synthetic model of citizen journalism participation. First, we hypothesize that local media use and interpersonal discussion will have a direct effect on citizen journalism participation. Unlike the communication mediation model, the theorized model juxtaposes interpersonal discussion with local media use. This specification is informed by CIT, which conceives locality-based interpersonal and mediated communication as storytelling agents fostering civic participation, and the literature on communication and social capital, which views communication activities as antecedents to formal and informal social activities. Second, drawing from CIT and the communication and social capital perspective, the theorized model proposes that organizational membership and neighborhood belonging will mediate the effects of local media use and interpersonal communication on citizen journalism participation. That is, the two storytelling agents are hypothesized to have an indirect positive effect on citizen journalism participation through the two social capital indicators, organizational membership and neighborhood belonging. Unlike CIT, and guided by the communication and social capital perspective, the theorized model considers organizational membership an outcome of the storytelling agents, as both news information and interpersonal communication present opportunities for residents to become acquainted with neighbors and learn about local events, which promote organizational involvement and development of deeper social relationships (e.g., Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004, 2006). When viewed in this regard, organizational membership and neighborhood belonging are separate from the communication-based processes that lead to them. Such formal and informal involvement, in turn, would be expected to promote civic participation manifested in citizen journalism participation, such as posting photos, videos, and news stories to share social activities. The hypothesized indirect links are consistent with the communication mediation model in that they take into account factors that may occur between communication and behavioral engagement. Third, drawing on CIT and the communication and social capital perspective, the theorized model positions collective efficacy as an outcome of organizational membership and neighborhood belonging leading to citizen journalism participation. In this regard, we propose a set of serial mediation hypotheses from the storytelling agents, to organizational membership and neighborhood belonging, to collective efficacy, to citizen journalism participation. The literature on social capital suggests that resources through formal and informal social networks can act as a fertile context in which residents develop the willingness to solve common problems (Sampson, 2002). Such a problem-solving orientation could manifest itself in the forms of citizen journalism participation whereby residents, for example, contribute photos and videos of trash on sidewalks, graffiti on buildings, and unsafe areas, and spotlight residents’ efforts to solve such problems. Overall, the theorized model goes beyond the straightforward stimulus–response (S–R) understanding of locality-oriented communication by examining an underlying process by which it leads to citizen journalism participation. Below, we propose conditional effects to further extend the role of locality-based communication in this process. Communication action context: ethnicity and community type Consistent with CIT and the communication and social capital theory, the theorized model considers communication action contexts as contextual variables that may moderate the proposed communication-based pathways to citizen journalism participation. Specifically, we test whether the model varies by ethnicity and place of residence in the United States. The CIT literature indicates that ethnic backgrounds act as a structural factor that promotes or constrains the development of communication infrastructure, with the role of storytelling agents in predicting civic engagement distinct across ethnic groups. For instance, Ball-Rokeach et al. (2001) showed that community storytelling agents were well-connected among old immigrants including Caucasians and African Americans, and hence those ethnic groups were more likely to have higher levels of neighborhood belonging than Latino and Asian immigrants. Similarly, Kim and Ball-Rokeach (2006b) found that ethnic heterogeneity as a structural factor situated in a communication action context was negatively related to collective efficacy. In other words, community members who resided in ethnically diverse communities were less likely to believe that their communities can collectively solve problems. In a similar context, Beaudoin and Thorson (2006) uncovered that the relationship between news media use and indicators of social capital, such as organizational membership and neighborliness, was weaker for African Americans than for Caucasians. Beaudoin (2011) also showed that the more citizens used traditional and online news media, the more likely they were to have bonding networks in their neighborhoods for Caucasians and Asians than for African Americans and Latinos. Taken together, research demonstrates that communication infrastructure is more prevalent for Caucasians. However, it is an open terrain for further empirical examination because research also shows some mixed findings concerning ethnicity and communication infrastructure, with reading newspaper news more civically positive for whites than Latinos yet watching television news being less so for whites than blacks (Beaudoin, 2009). Therefore, we propose the following research question instead of a research hypothesis. RQ1: To what extent will the theorized model vary across ethnic groups? CIT was proposed and has been tested primarily in urban community contexts. To extend this line of research, the current study investigates whether the theorized model varies across urban and nonurban communities. Urban and nonurban areas present a different set of opportunities and constraints for participation as community storytelling agents. For instance, Hindman (2000) found that residents in urban and rural communities were different in their use of information technologies, with urban residents having more advantages in accessing information technologies than rural residents. This early finding in terms of the digital divide aligns with a recent study showing that those who resided in metropolitan areas were more likely to use the Internet to seek community-oriented news and information concerning community issues or public affairs (Nah et al., 2016). In the context of media use and social capital, Beaudoin and Thorson (2004) found that residents in rural communities were more likely to rely on newspapers for news and information, leading to increased social capital. Reports also show noticeable differences across communities in residents’ contributions to the online public sphere. For example, a national survey by the Pew Research Center showed that residents in urban and suburban areas were more likely to participate in sharing or creating local news or information such as posting comments on a local news story and contributing an article, opinion piece, picture, or video about the local community to an online news site (Miller, Rainie, Purcell, Mitchell, & Rosenstiel, 2012). Research has also reported that residents in urban and rural communities show different levels of Internet use for social, economic, and health purposes (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2014; Hale, Cotton, Drentea, & Goldner, 2010). In light of these differences by community type, we propose the following research question: RQ2: To what extent will the theorized model vary across communities? Method Data in this study were based on national online panels of participants recruited by Survey Sampling International (SSI), who conducted a web survey during late May and early June 2015. While targeting minority groups to balance out each ethnic group, SSI considered demographic features, such as gender, age, and community type (e.g., urban vs. rural) to match the demographic composition of the U.S. population. They sent an invitation to participate in the survey to 6,048 individuals. A total of 1,201 participants completed the survey with a final response rate of 19.86%. The median age of the sample was 44.0. The samples included more males (60.5%) than females (39.5%), and more participants from higher education and income groups than lower. The sample included members of diverse ethnic groups (Caucasian/White = 43.1%, African American/Black = 17.2%, Hispanic/Latino = 17%, Asian American = 14.7%, and Others = 8%). Measurement Citizen journalism participation The survey measured citizen journalism with two sets of items (Nah et al., 2015). It asked respondents how frequently they contributed to professional (or mainstream) news media sites on a 7-point scale (1 = not at all; 7 = very frequently) in the following ways: make comments, submit photos, submit videos, and submit news stories. Similarly, it asked respondents how frequently they contributed to citizen (or alternative) news media sites. The survey gave respondents the definition of citizen journalism and differences between professional/mainstream and citizen/alternative media prior to the sets of items. Responses were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 2.72, SD = 1.96, α = .99). Local news media The survey measured local newspaper, TV news, and Internet use (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b; McLeod et al., 1996). It asked respondents how often they read newspaper stories about local politics or community issues, and how much attention they paid to those newspaper stories. Responses to the two items were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 3.93, SD = 1.97, r = .82). Likewise, the survey asked respondents how often they watched or read and how much attention they paid to television and Internet news stories about local politics or community issues. Responses to each pair of the items were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 4.55, SD = 1.73, r = .83 for local TV news use and M = 4.66, SD = 1.83, r = .81 for local Internet use). Interpersonal discussion The survey employed two items to measure interpersonal discussion (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b; McLeod et al., 1999). It asked respondents how often they talked about local politics or community issues with other people on a 7-point scale (1 = never; 7 = very frequently). It also asked, on a 7-point scale (1 = never; 7 = all the time), how often they had discussions with other people about things happening in their neighborhood. Responses were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 4.42, SD = 1.64, r = .77). Organizational membership The survey employed five items to measure organizational membership (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b; Nah et al., 2016). It asked respondents to indicate in a dichotomous fashion whether they belonged to any of the following organizations: sport or recreational organization; cultural, ethnic, or religious organization; neighborhood or homeowner’s organization; political or educational organization; and other. Responses were combined to form an additive index (M = 1.33, SD = 1.51, α = .72). Neighborhood belonging The survey used eight items to measure neighborhood belonging (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b). It asked respondents to indicate the extent to which they agreed or disagreed with each of the following statements on a 7-point scale: (a) I am interested in knowing what my neighbors are like; (b) I enjoy meeting or talking with my neighbors; (c) it is easy to become friends with my neighbors; and (d) I let my neighbors borrow things from me and/or my family. It also asked, on a 7-point scale (1 = never; 7 = a lot), how many of their neighbors they knew well enough to ask them to keep watch on their house or apartment, give them a ride, talk with them about a personal problem, and provide assistance in making a repair. Responses were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 4.15, SD = 1.55, α = .94). Collective efficacy The survey used six items to measure collective efficacy (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b). It asked respondents to indicate, on a 7-point scale (1 = none; 7 = all), how many of their neighbors they felt could be counted on to do something if: “a stop sign or speed bump was needed to prevent people from driving too fast through your neighborhood,” “there were dangerous potholes on the streets where you live,” “the sports field that neighborhood kids want to play on has become unsafe due to poor maintenance or gangs,” “you asked them to help you organize a holiday block party,” “a child in your neighborhood is showing clear evidence of being in trouble or getting into big trouble,” and “the trees in your neighborhood were uprooting the sidewalks making them unsafe.” Responses were averaged on a 7-point scale (M = 4.20, SD = 1.64, α = .94). Analytical strategy We examined the proposed model using path analysis. We first residualized the theoretical variables to remove the influences of the control variables (e.g., age, gender, education, income, ethnicity, place of residence, and length of residence).1 We then created a residualized covariance matrix for data analysis. The theorized model specifies local media use and interpersonal discussion as exogenous variables. They were allowed to covary freely. We specified no causal linkage between organizational membership and neighborhood belonging. As they are likely related in nonrecursive fashions, a covariance between the error terms was estimated. To examine whether structural parameters significantly vary by ethnicity (RQ1) and place of residence (RQ2), we performed multiple group path analysis. We first disaggregated place of residence into urban and nonurban groups and ethnicity into Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians. Then, we residualized the theoretical variables using the same control variables minus the four dummy-coded ethnicity variables (i.e., Caucasians, African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians) for each ethnic group and minus place of residence for urban and nonurban groups, and created covariance matrices for each subgroup. We first estimated a baseline model with no constraints specified on the model parameters across groups, followed by a constrained model where all path coefficients were specified equal across groups. Other parameters, such as disturbance variances, were not constrained equally, as doing so can be considered excessively stringent (Byrne, 2010). We examined the proposed moderation effect by ethnicity and place of residence by comparing a chi-square difference between an unconstrained baseline model and a constrained model. We performed all analyses with R package “lavaan” (Rosseel, 2012). Results The model fit the data reasonably well, as shown by the following global fit indices: χ2 (4) = 34.163, p = .000; CFI = .994; Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .023; and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .080 (.056–.105). CFI higher than .95 and SRMR smaller than .08 indicate a good fit of the model to the data (Hu & Bentler, 1999). Although the significant chi-square represents a poor fit, it is typically sensitive to a large sample size. The RMSEA value of .080 indicates a mediocre fit at best (MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). On balance, however, these indices indicate that the model is acceptable at a global level. Based on the theoretical guidance and the fit indices, we retain the current model. We now turn our attention to individual path coefficients. As is shown in Figure 1, local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion had a positive association with organizational membership (γ = .219, p < .001 and γ = .276, p < .001, respectively). Neighborhood belonging was predicted by local newspaper use, local TV news use, and interpersonal discussion (γ = .290, p < .001, γ = .134, p < .001, and γ = .363, p < .001, respectively). Local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion were directly associated with increases in citizen journalism participation as well (γ = .202, p < .001 and γ = .092, p < .05, respectively) (Figure 1). Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A path model of communication and citizen journalism participation. Notes. N = 1,192. Entries are completely standardized coefficients significant at p < .05. The effects of age, gender, education, income, race (i.e., Caucasians/Whites, African American/Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, and Asians), place of residence, and length of residence were residualized. Model goodness of fit: χ2(4) = 34.163, p = .000; CFI = .994; SRMR = .023; RMSEA = .080 (.056–.105). Variance explained: Citizen journalism participation = 42.5%; collective efficacy = 40.7%; organizational membership = 20.7%; neighborhood belonging = 44.5%. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide A path model of communication and citizen journalism participation. Notes. N = 1,192. Entries are completely standardized coefficients significant at p < .05. The effects of age, gender, education, income, race (i.e., Caucasians/Whites, African American/Blacks, Hispanics/Latinos, and Asians), place of residence, and length of residence were residualized. Model goodness of fit: χ2(4) = 34.163, p = .000; CFI = .994; SRMR = .023; RMSEA = .080 (.056–.105). Variance explained: Citizen journalism participation = 42.5%; collective efficacy = 40.7%; organizational membership = 20.7%; neighborhood belonging = 44.5%. Next, organizational membership and neighborhood belonging both had a positive association with collective efficacy (β = .062, p < .05 and β = .608, p < .001, respectively). They also had a direct, positive relationship with citizen journalism participation (β = .118, p < .001 and β = .280, p < .001, respectively). The error covariance between organizational membership and neighborhood belonging was significant (ψ = .240). Furthermore, collective efficacy was directly associated with increases in citizen journalism participation (β = .163, p < .001). Next, an examination of indirect linkages revealed that local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion had an indirect relationship with citizen journalism participation through organizational membership (standardized coefficients = .026, p < .001 and .033, p < .001. respectively). Also, local newspaper use, local TV news use, and interpersonal discussion had an indirect link with citizen journalism participation via neighborhood belonging (standardized coefficients = .081, p < .001, .037, p < .001, and .102, p < .001, respectively). Finally, we tested serial mediation models. Local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion were related to citizen journalism participation through organizational membership and collective efficacy in serial (standardized coefficients = .002, p < .05 and .003, p < .05, respectively). The data also revealed that local newspaper use, local TV news use, and interpersonal discussion had an indirect relationship with citizen journalism participation through neighborhood belonging and collective efficacy in sequential fashions (standardized coefficients = .029, p < .001, .013, p < .01, and .036, p < .001, respectively). RQ1 addressed the extent to which the model would vary by ethnicity. A model without constraints across Caucasians, African Americans, Hispanics, and Asians fit the data well: χ2 (16) = 38.930, p < .001; CFI = .995; SRMR = .024; and RMSEA = .072 (.044–.101). A constrained model also fit the data well: χ2 (67) = 85.958, p < .059; CFI = .996; SRMR = .036; and RMSEA = .032 (.000–.051). A chi-square difference test showed no significant difference in fit between the two models: χ2 (51) = 47.028, p > .05, suggesting that the path coefficients did not vary across the four groups. RQ2 asked about the extent to which the model would vary by place of residence. A model without constraints across urban and nonurban groups fit the data well: χ2 (8) = 38.376, p < .001; CFI = .994; SRMR = .024; and RMSEA = .080 (.056–.106). A model constraining the path coefficients to be invariant across urban and nonurban groups also fit the data well: χ2 (25) = 58.359, p < .001; CFI = .993; SRMR = .034; and RMSEA = .047 (.032–.063). A chi-square difference test showed no significant difference in fit between the two models: χ2 (17) = 19.983, p > .05. The result suggests that the path coefficients were invariant across urban and nonurban groups. Overall, no subgroup difference in path coefficients was found by ethnicity and place of residence from the present analysis. Additional analyses The extent to which citizens participate in journalistic practices might vary by participation form and platform, as contributing content to professional/mainstream and alternative/citizen news sites may be qualitatively different from each other. It is possible to view citizens’ contributions to mainstream/professional news sites as their responses to news content produced by professional journalists and those to alternative/citizen news sites as citizen production, a more active form of citizen journalism participation. To examine this possibility, we collapsed citizen journalism participation into professional/mainstream and alternative/citizen platforms and assessed our model for the two forms of citizen journalism participation. Results from this analysis indicate that our model fits the data well: χ2 (4) = 34.163, p = .000; CFI = .994; SRMR = .023; and RMSEA = .080 (.056–.105) both for citizen journalism participation in professional/mainstream news sites and alternative/citizen news sites. Although the magnitude of the direct and indirect effects was marginally different between the two platforms, it was substantively equivalent to the above results. The model accounted for 41.6% of the variance in citizen participation to professional/mainstream news sites, whereas it explained 41.1% of the variance in citizen participation to citizen/alternative news sites. Discussion Citizens’ journalistic contributions help enrich public spheres, as the public have increased opportunities to learn about issues, events, and alternative views that may not be readily available in traditional news media. Such citizen activities can be considered a form of civic participation. Synthesizing existing theoretical explanations, the present study has developed an integrative model to account for why some citizens contribute news items to the public spheres, either professional/mainstream news sites or citizen/alternative news sites, while others do not. To take into account the role of communication action contexts, we further examined whether the theorized model would be moderated by ethnicity and community type. Overall, the results presented above show that two main communication variables drove citizens to participate in citizen journalism practice. First, while controlling for all other variables, local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion had a direct positive relationship with citizen journalism participation, indicating that respondents who used local newspapers for community information and discussed a local community with others tended to contribute news content as citizen journalists. The direct relationships between newspaper use and interpersonal discussion and civic participation have been reported previously (e.g., Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004; McLeod et al., 1996, 1999; Shah et al., 2005, 2007). Second, moving beyond the direct effects, local newspaper use and interpersonal discussion were indirectly associated with increases in citizen journalism participation via organizational membership and neighborhood belonging. That is, respondents who used local newspapers for community information and talked about community matters with others were more likely to be involved in local organizations and be closely attached to neighbors, which, in turn, promoted their journalistic contributions. Local TV news use also had an indirect link with citizen journalism participation via neighborhood belonging. The results are consistent with the literature on CIT and communication and social capital (e.g., Beaudoin & Thorson, 2004; Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b). As storytelling agents, local newspapers, interpersonal discussion, and partially local TV news help residents learn about local events and groups and develop deep sentiments and relationships with neighbors, thus promoting participation in community organizations and neighborhood belonging. Such formal and informal networks prompt contributions of news items, as residents are likely to share their routine or special activities with online communities. Furthermore, the observed serial mediation suggests that respondents who used local newspapers for community information and discussed community matters with others were more likely to contribute news items, regardless of the types of public spheres and news sites, as they were more closely involved in local organizations and attached to their neighbors. Such formal and informal networks, in turn, cultivated their willingness to solve local issues. We observed the same serial mediation effect for local TV news use, neighborhood belonging, and collective efficacy. The pathways from organizational membership and neighborhood belonging to collective efficacy to citizen journalism participation are consistent with the social capital perspective. As the literature on social capital indicates, community organizations and informal social networks constitute a fertile ground for the development of social resources needed for collective action. Thus, it is reasonable to view community organizations and informal social networks as a source of collective efficacy, which, in turn, takes the forms of citizen journalism participation as an effort to make community problems known and encourage collective action to address them. The present results entail theoretical, practical, and policy implications. In terms of theoretical implications, the integrative model offers a useful theoretical framework that can explain the underlying mechanism by which community residents participate in citizen journalism on the online public spheres and the extent to which community-oriented communication through newspaper reading and interpersonal discussion matters in the citizen journalism practice. Considering that the model was invariant by ethnicity and community type, the findings suggest that Caucasian-dominant and more diverse communities as well as communities of different sizes can seek to encourage residents to use local newspapers to learn about community matters, which can stimulate public discussion among residents. Such place-based communication can foster participatory news production, which is conductive to democratic communication and problem-solving action. In this process, for example, local newspapers may actively highlight the activities of community groups, organizations, and residents to help readers become more familiar with local actors and, by doing so, foster residents’ participation in formal and informal social networks. A nonprofit news media organization also could serve as a community information commons, connecting residents with various nonprofit and voluntary groups through community partnership with corporations and local governments. Such attempts could stimulate organizational participation and, in turn, contributions of news items to the public spheres both in physical and virtual settings (Levine, 2002; Nah, 2010). Moreover, local communities might sponsor and promote events at such places as local parks, downtown areas, public libraries, and community centers where community members can become acquainted with each other and talk about local issues and problems. Such community-driven projects might enable the lifeworld, or a communicatively integrated sphere comprising culture, norms, value, and commitment (Habermas, 1981/1987), which could further nurture civil society through revitalized local public spheres in which citizens discuss community issues or local politics to achieve common goals (Friedland, 2001; Friedland & McLeod, 1999). Thus, policymakers, news professionals, community activists, and nonprofit professionals should consider initiating nonprofit journalism in their respective local communities. Despite the useful insights presented above, the current study faces several notable limitations that must be addressed by future research. First, future studies should continue to integrate existing theories and examine other potential communication-based pathways to civic engagement. There may be other mediating and moderating mechanisms at work that we did not explore in the present study. Although our study did not find significant differences in citizen journalism participation between professional/mainstream and citizen/alternative news sites, citizens might actively perform journalistic practices in other online venues, such as local social media sites and groups. Future studies might want to address such a possibility. Also, to extend the present study, future scholarship should consider individuals’ motivation to contribute to the public spheres and their abilities to navigate agreement and disagreement concerning local issues or public affairs. Second, future work should employ longitudinal data to offer more causally robust empirical evidence. It is important to address this issue, particularly given multiple mediation linkages proposed in our model. Third, we encourage future work to employ multiple research methods, such as in-depth interviews and participant observation, to better understand why local residents participate in community storytelling and practice citizen journalism. Such an approach would help present nuanced understandings of how members of different social backgrounds see participation in local activities. For example, members of different ethnic groups might conceive the meaning of neighborhood belonging differently and enact it in different manners in their day-to-day living. Other research methods noted above would help address this possibility. Further, future scholarship should conduct community participatory action research, working together with the community at large, including residents, news media organizations, and community organizations, to explore ways to reinvigorate each community storytelling agent. Targeted practices and policies for community storytelling agents would help revitalize the online public sphere as a catalyst to creating a healthy democracy. Fourth, future work should consider linking individual communication activities and citizen journalism participation with theoretically salient community contexts such as ethnic heterogeneity and residential stability (Kim & Ball-Rokeach, 2006b). Multilevel design with a focus on neighborhoods within a specific community or city (e.g., Los Angeles, Chicago, New York) would help investigate how larger community structural factors influence an individual’s motivation to obtain local information, talk with neighbors, and contribute news content online. Fifth, the current measurement of citizen journalism participation was broad in scope and did not ask whether respondents’ journalistic contributions concerned community issues and events or not. Given our model focuses on locality-based communication and social mechanisms, there is an important discrepancy between our theoretical model and the operationalization of the outcome variable. Finally, the present sample based on an online panel of participants who volunteered to fill out the survey was not representative of the population. To address the limited generalizability of the findings especially with oversampled minority groups, researchers should use probability-based sampling techniques or representative online panel such as GfK KnowledgePanel. In doing so, future scholarship should overcome the issue of causality from the cross-sectional survey moving toward a panel study through representative sampling. These limitations notwithstanding, the current study confirms the validity of the three dominant theoretical approaches in which the integrative model is grounded, all of which emphasize communication as a catalyst for local involvement and civic activities. Most of all, the current study reassures the value of communication in fostering citizen journalism practice as a forms of civic participation and advances these lines of research. In other words, our study adds theoretical insights into the existing body of literature in the sense that place-based communication still matters even in today’s digitally networked communication and action contexts, especially given that citizen journalism practice has the potential to revitalize the public spheres in both offline and online settings for a healthy democracy. Therefore, the unique contribution of the current study is to offer theorized model that could serve as an applicable approach in this unexplored area of place-based communication and citizen journalism practice as civic participation. Future scholarship should continue theoretical integration to better understand the role of communication in building a civically vibrant society. Footnotes 1 Age was measured in an open-ended manner (M = 42.42, SD = 13.16). Gender was coded with females as the high value (female = 39.5%). Race/ethnicity was measured by a 7-category item: Caucasian/White (N = 518, 43.1%), African American/Black (N = 207, 17.2%), Hispanic/Latino (N = 204, 17.0%), Asian (N = 176, 14.7%), American Indian/Alaska Native (N = 33, 2.7%), Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (N = 3, .2%), and Others (N = 60, 5.0%). Based on the distribution, we created four dummy variables for Caucasian, African American/Black, Hispanic/Latino, and Asian groups. Education was measured on a 7-point scale ranging from 8th grade or less to graduate or professional degree (median = 5). We based income on an 11-point scale item ranging from under $10,000 to $200,000 or more (median = 6). Place of residence was determined using respondents’ zip codes. Zip codes with 100% urban population identified by the 2010 U.S. Census ZIP Code Tabulation Areas (ZCTAs) were coded as urban communities (46.8%), while those with mixture of urban and rural population and 100% rural population were coded as nonurban communities. Length of residence was measured in an open-ended format (M = 16.00, SD = 13.59). References Allan , S. ( 2006 ). Online news: Journalism and the Internet . Maidenhead, England and New York : Open University Press . Asen , R. , & Brower , D. ( 2001 ). Counterpublics and the state . Albany, NY : State University of New York Press . Atton , C. ( 2003 ). What is “alternative” journalism? Journalism , 4, 267 – 272 . doi:10.1177/14648849030043001 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Ball-Rokeach , S. J. , Kim , Y.-C. , & Matei , S. ( 2001 ). Storytelling neighborhood: Paths to belonging in diverse urban environments . Communication Research , 28, 392 – 428 . doi:10.1177/009365001028004003 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Beaudoin , C. E. ( 2009 ). Exploring the association between news exposure and social capital: Evidence of variance by ethnicity and medium . Communication Research , 35, 611 – 636 . doi:10.1177/0093650209338905 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Beaudoin , C. E. ( 2011 ). News effects on bonding and bridging social capital: An empirical study relevant to ethnicity in the United States . Communication Research , 38 ( 2 ), 155 – 178 . doi:10.1177/0093650210381598 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Beaudoin , C. E. , & Thorson , E. ( 2004 ). Social capital in rural and urban communities: Testing differences in media effects and models . Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly , 81, 378 – 399 . doi:10.1177/107769900408100210 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Beaudoin , C. E. , & Thorson , E. ( 2006 ). The social capital of blacks and whites: Differing effects of the mass media in the United States . Human Communication Research , 32, 157 – 177 . doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00007.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Bourdieu , P. ( 1986 ). The forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp. 241 – 258 ). New York : Greenwood Press . Byrne , B. M. ( 2010 ). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming ( 2nd ed. ). NY : Routledge . Chen , N.-T. N. , Dong , F. , Ball-Rokeach , S. J. , Parks , M. , & Huang , J. ( 2012 ). Building a new media platform for local storytelling and civic engagement in ethnically diverse neighborhoods . New Media & Society , 14, 931 – 950 . doi:10.1177/1461444811435640 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Chung , D. S. , Nah , S. , & Yamamoto , M. ( 2017 ). Conceptualizing citizen journalism: U.S. news editors’ views. Journalism, https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916686596 Coleman , J. ( 1988 ). Social capital in the creation of human capital . The American Journal of Sociology , 94, S95 – S120 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Dahlberg , L. ( 2001 ). Computer-mediated communication and the public sphere: A critical analysis . Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 7 ( 1 ). doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2001.tb00137.x Dahlgren , P. ( 2005 ). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation . Political Communication , 22 ( 2 ), 147 – 162 . doi:10.1080/10584600590933160 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS van Deursen , A. JAM , & van Dijk , J. AGM . ( 2014 ). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage . New Media & Society , 16, 507 – 526 . doi:10.1177/1461444813487959 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Downing , J. ( 2003 ). Audiences and readers of alternative media: The absent lure of the virtually unknown . Media, Culture & Society , 25, 625 – 645 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Eley , G. ( 1992 ). Nations, publics, and political cultures: Placing Habermas in the nineteenth century. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas in the public sphere (pp. 289 – 339 ). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press . Farinosi M. , & Treré , E. ( 2014 ). Challenging mainstream media, documenting real life and sharing with the community: An analysis of the motivations for producing citizen journalism in a post-disaster city . Global Media and Communication , 10 ( 1 ), 73 – 92 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Fico , F. , Lacy , S. , Wildman , S. S. , Baldwin , T. , Bergan , D. , & Zube , P. ( 2013 ). Citizen journalism sites as information substitutes and complements for United States newspaper coverage of local governments . Digital Journalism , 1 ( 1 ), 152 – 168 . doi:10.1080/21670811.2012.740270 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Forde , S. , Foxwell , K. , & Meadows , M. ( 2003 ). Through the lens of the local: Public arena journalism in the Australian community broadcasting sector . Journalism , 4, 314 – 335 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Fraser , N. ( 1992 ). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas in the public sphere (pp. 109 – 142 ). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press . Friedland , L. A. ( 2001 ). Communication, community, and democracy: Toward a theory of the communicatively integrated community . Communication Research , 28, 358 – 391 . doi:10.1177/009365001028004002 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Friedland , L. A. , Hove , T. , & Rojas , H. ( 2006 ). The networked public sphere . Javnost-The Public , 13 ( 4 ), 5 – 26 . doi:10.1080/13183222.2006.11008922 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Friedland , L. A. , & Kim , N. ( 2009 ). Citizen journalism. In D. C. Whitney & C. H. Sterling (Eds.), Encyclopedia of journalism (pp. 297 – 302 ). Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage . Friedland , L. A. , & McLeod , J. M. ( 1999 ). Community integration and mass media: A reconsideration. In D. P. Demers & K. Viswanath (Eds.), Mass media, social control and social change (pp. 197 – 226 ). Ames, IA : Iowa State University Press . Garnham , N. ( 1992 ). The media and the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas in the public sphere (pp. 359 – 376 ). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press . Habermas , J. ( 1962 /1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere (T. Burger, Trans.). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press . Habermas , J. ( 1974 ). The public sphere: An encyclopedia article . New German Critique , 3, 49 – 55 . doi:10.2307/487737 Habermas , J. ( 1981 /1987). Theory of communicative action: Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason (T. McCarthy, Trans.) (Vol. 2). Boston, MA : Beacon Press . Hale , T. M. , Cotton , S. R. , Drentea , P. , & Goldner , M. ( 2010 ). Rural-urban differences in general and health-related Internet use . American Behavioral Scientist , 53, 1304 – 1325 . doi:10.1177/0002764210361685 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Hindman , D. B. ( 2000 ). The rural-urban digital divide . Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly , 77, 549 – 560 . doi:10.1177/107769900007700306 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Hu , L. T. , & Bentler , P. M. ( 1999 ). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives . Structural Equation Modeling , 6, 1 – 55 . doi:10.1080/10705519909540118 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Kahne , J. , Lee , N.-J. , & Feezell , J. T. ( 2012 ). Digital media literacy education and online civic and political participation . International Journal of Communication , 6, 1 – 24 . Katz , E. , & Lazarsfeld , P. F. ( 1955 ). Personal influence: The part played by the people in the flow of mass communications . Glencoe, IL : Free Press . Kim , Y.-C. , & Ball-Rokeach , S. J. ( 2006 a). Civic engagement from a communication infrastructure perspective . Communication Theory , 16, 173 – 197 . doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2006.00267.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Kim , Y.-C. , & Ball-Rokeach , S. J. ( 2006 b). Community storytelling network, neighborhood context, and civic engagement: A multilevel approach . Human Communication Research , 32, 411 – 439 . doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.2006.00282.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Kikuchi , M. , & Coleman , C.-L. ( 2012 ). Explicating and measuring social relationships in social capital research . Communication Theory , 22, 187 – 203 . doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01401.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Lacy , S. , Duffy , M. , Riffe , D. , Thorson E. , & Fleming , K. ( 2010 ). Citizen journalism web sites complement newspapers . Newspaper Research Journal , 31 ( 2 ), 34 – 46 . doi:10.1177/073953291003100204 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Levine , P. ( 2002 ). Building the Electronic Commons: A project of the democracy collaborative . The Good Society , 11 ( 3 ), 1 – 9 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Lewis , S. C. ( 2012 ). The tension between professional control and open participation: Journalism and its boundaries . Information, Communication & Society , 15, 836 – 866 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Lim , M. ( 2012 ). Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses: Social media and oppositional movements in Egypt, 2004–2011 . Journal of Communication , 62, 231 – 248 . doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01628.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS MacCallum , R. C. , Browne , M. W. , & Sugawara , H. M. ( 1996 ). Power analysis and determination of sample size for covariance structure modeling . Psychological Methods , 1, 130 – 149 . doi:10.1037/1082-989X.1.2.130 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Markus , H. , & Zajonc , R. B. ( 1985 ). The cognitive perspective in social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology ( 3rd ed. , Vol. 1, pp. 137 – 230 ). New York : Random House . McLeod , D. M. , Kosicki , G. M. , and McLeod , J. M. ( 2002 ). Resurveying the boundaries of political communications effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillman (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 215 – 267 ). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates . McLeod , J. M. , Daily , K. , Guo , Z. , Eveland , W. P. Jr. , Bayer , J. , Yang , S. , & Wang , H. ( 1996 ). Community integration, local media use and democratic processes . Communication Research , 23, 179 – 209 . doi:10.1177/009365096023002002 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS McLeod , J. M. , Scheufele , D. A. , & Moy , P. ( 1999 ). Community, communication, and participation: The role of mass media and interpersonal discussion in local political participation . Political Communication , 16, 315 – 336 . doi:10.1080/105846099198659 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Miller , C. , Rainie , L. , Purcell , K. , Mitchell , A. , & Rosenstiel , T. ( 2012 , 26 September). How people get local news and information in different communities. Pew Research Center Internet, Science & Tech. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/09/26/how-people-get-local-news-and-information-in-different-communities/. Nah , S. ( 2010 ). A theoretical and analytical framework toward networked communities: A case of the electronic community information commons . Javnost - Public , 17 , 23 – 36 . doi:10.1080/13183222.2010.11009024 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Nah , S. , Yamamoto , M. , Chung , D. S. , & Zuercher , R. ( 2015 ). Modeling the use of citizen journalism by online newspapers . Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly , 92 , 399 – 420 . doi:10.1177/1077699015574483 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Nah , S. , Namkoong , K. , Chen , N. , T , N. , & Hustedde , R. J. ( 2016 ). A communicative approach to community development: The effect of neighborhood storytelling network on civic participation . Community Development , 47 , 11 – 28 . doi:10.1080/15575330.2015.1094497 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Nip , J. ( 2006 ). Exploring the second phase of public journalism . Journalism Studies , 7, 212 – 236 . doi:10.1080/14616700500533528 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Ognyanova , K. , Chen , N.-T. N. , An , Z. , Son , M. , Gerson , D. , Ball-Rokeach , S. , & Parks , M. ( 2013 ). Online participation in a community context: Patterns of civic engagement and connections to local communication resources . International Journal of Communication , 7, 2433 – 2456 . Outing , S. ( 2005 ). The 11 layers of citizen journalism. Poynter. Retrieved from https://www.poynter.org/2005/the-11-layers-of-citizen-journalism/69328/. Palczewski , C. ( 2001 ). Cyber-movements, new social movements, and counterpublics. In R. Asen & D. Brower (Eds.), Counterpublilcs and the state (pp. 161 – 167 ). Albany, NY : State University of New York Press . Paxton , P. ( 1999 ). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment . American Journal of Sociology , 105, 88 – 127 . doi:10.1086/210268 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Portes , A. ( 1998 ). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology . American Review of Sociology , 24, 1 – 24 . doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.24.1.1 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Putnam , R. D. ( 1995 ). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital . Journal of Democracy , 6, 65 – 78 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Putnam , R. D. ( 2000 ). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community . New York : Simon & Schuster . Rodríguez , C. ( 2001 ). Fissures in the mediascape: An international study of citizens’ media . Creskill, NJ : Hampton Press . Rosseel , Y. ( 2012 ). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling . Journal of Statistical Software , 48 ( 2 ), 1 – 36 . doi:10.18637/jss.v048.i02 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Roth , L. , & Valaskakis , G. ( 1989 ). Aboriginal broadcasting in Canada: A case study in democratization. In M. Raboy & P. A. Bruck (Eds.), Communication for and against democracy (pp. 221 – 234 ), Montreal, Canada : Black Rose Books . Sampson , R. J. ( 2002 ). Organized for what? Recasting theories of social (Dis)organization. In E. J. Waring & D. Weisburd (Eds.), Crime & social organization (pp. 95 – 110 ). New Brunswick, NJ : Transaction Publishers . Shah , D. V. , Cho , J. , Eveland , W. P. , & Kwak , N. ( 2005 ). Information and expression in a digital age: Modeling Internet effects on civic participation . Communication Research , 32, 531 – 565 . doi:10.1177/0093650205279209 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Shah , D. V. , Cho , J. , Nah , S. , Gotlieb , M. R. , Hwang , H. , Lee , N.-J. , Scholl , R. M. , & McLeod , D. M. ( 2007 ). Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: Extending the communication mediation model . Journal of Communication , 57, 676 – 703 . doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00363.x Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Shah , D. V. , Kwak , N. , & Holbert , R. L. ( 2001 ). Connecting and disconnecting with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital . Political Communication , 18, 141 – 162 . doi:10.1080/105846001750322952 Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS Wall , M. ( 2015 ). Citizen journalism: A retrospective on what we know, an agenda for what we don’t . Digital Journalism , 3 ( 6 ), 1 – 17 . Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Communication Association. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - Communication and Citizenship Revisited: Theorizing Communication and Citizen Journalism Practice as Civic Participation
JF - Communication Theory
DO - 10.1093/ct/qty019
DA - 2019-02-01
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/communication-and-citizenship-revisited-theorizing-communication-and-NpqaOdcdYz
SP - 24
VL - 29
IS - 1
DP - DeepDyve
ER -