1. Introduction

The United Nations' Sustainable Development Goal 16 (SDG 16) aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. In the digital age, social media has emerged as a powerful tool for fostering political engagement and shaping public discourse (Kim & Ellison, 2022). This study investigates the relationships among online communication, social capital, and political participation in South Korea and the United States, two countries that held presidential elections in a similar period.

Social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, have become increasingly influential in the political process, affecting election results and voter engagement (Zhuravskaya et al., 2020). The open nature of social media allows users to engage in political dialogs, build communities, and enjoy a sense of political connectedness, overcoming the limitations of the offline world where a small number of people dominate opinions (SDG 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels).

Online communication through social media facilitates networking among individuals who share similar social characteristics, enabling voters to express and share their political opinions to a greater degree than through traditional election systems. This phenomenon represents a new form of political participation that contributes to the creation of collective intelligence, social trust, and political influence.

As the digital era evolves, the form of capital is shifting from traditional physical capital to intangible social capital, such as social trust (Tefera & Hunsaker, 2020). Online communication goes beyond simple exchanges of knowledge and information, building collective intelligence and creating new value. The social capital accumulated in the virtual world has the potential to affect the offline world, contributing to the promotion of democracy in real life (SDG 16.6: Developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels).

The United States and South Korea held their last presidential elections in an approximately similar period: the former in November 2016 and the latter in May 2017. One thing that was common in these two elections was the active use of social media in politics. While a range of social media platforms, including Facebook and Twitter, were used in previous elections, social media in the recent presidential elections in the two countries arguably affected election results to a degree (Cho & Kim, 2019). In both countries, not only do online platforms, including social media, have a significant influence on elections and the political process in general, but the voters adapt quickly themselves to the changing digital environment (Lee, 2016).

The increasing influence of social media on political participation can be partly attributed to the nature of social media (Choi, 2018). Most social media platforms are open to anyone who wants to join and allow users to engage in political dialogs, build communities, and enjoy a sense of political connectedness (Lee, 2016). In addition, social media saves users the cost of obtaining the information needed for political participation and provides immediacy of action (Cho, 2011; Aldrich, 1993).

Online communication through social media makes it easier for people to find and network with others who share similar social characteristics (Kim, 2016). Hence, voters can express and share their political opinions to a much greater degree than through the traditional election system (Lee et al., 2018). This phenomenon can be seen as a new form of political participation that overcomes the limitations of the offline world, in which a small number of people dominate opinions and the majority remain silent (Noelle-Neumann, 1974).

It is argued that online communication goes beyond simple exchanges of knowledge and information but builds collective intelligence and creates new value (Lévy, 2010). It also enables the creation of social trust, which used to be possible only through face-to-face direct contact, as well as the exertion of political influence (Lin, 2002; Owen, 1999; Ryu, 2010). In addition, the form of capital is shifting from traditional physical capital to intangible social capital (social trust), which continues to change in line with the ever-evolving digital era.

The internet is also leading to changes in political participation (Lew et al., 2005; Wellman et al., 2001). Some argue that with the social capital accumulated in the virtual world affecting the offline world, political participation on the internet contributes to the promotion of democracy in real life (Seo & Park, 2003; Song, 2015; Teorell, 2003).

However, there is insufficient empirical research on how common and different online political activities are by country and culture and how online political activities and social capital shared among participants affect offline political participation.

This paper compares the influence of social media in South Korea and the United States, the two countries that held a presidential election in a similar period, to promote our understanding of how the relationships between online communication, social capital, and political participation take shape in different countries.

By conducting empirical research on the commonalities and differences in online political activities and the impact of shared social capital on offline political participation, this study contributes to the understanding of how social media can be harnessed to promote inclusive and participatory decision-making processes.

In line with SDG 16, this study highlights the potential of social media to foster inclusive and participatory political engagement, contributing to the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions. By promoting online communication and building social capital, social media can serve as a catalyst for positive change, helping to create more peaceful and inclusive societies.

However, to fully realize the benefits of social media in promoting sustainable social development, it is essential to address challenges such as online polarization and the spread of misinformation. By engaging a wide range of stakeholders, including governments, civil society organizations, and citizens, in the process of building healthy online communities, we can work toward achieving SDG 16 and creating a more equitable and sustainable future.

2. Literature review

Political participation and its relevance to UN SDG 16

Different scholars define political participation in different ways. It can be limited to institutionalized systems such as elections or widened to encompass all activities related to politics (Huntington and Nelson, 1976; Kim, 2016; Kim et al., 2019; Verba & Nie, 1987). The method and form of political participation have changed over the course of time and will continue to do so (Song, 2014). Hence, the concept of political participation needs to be understood through contextual and historical perspectives.

Political participation is similar to other collective social behaviors in that it is voluntary-based but distinctive, as it aims to gain control of the government (Verba & Nie, 1987). In other words, it is a social activity that aims to acquire power, and there are diverse ways of participating (Brady et al., 1995). Van Deth (2014) created a conceptual map of political participation in the form of an algorithm. Political participation should be manifested as action, and the action should be taken on a voluntary basis by general citizens, not by those involved in politics (Kim, 2016). In this context, political participation can be defined as voluntary actions by general citizens with a specific political goal.

Political participation is closely linked to UN SDG 16, which aims to promote peaceful and inclusive societies, provide access to justice for all, and build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions at all levels. By engaging in political activities, citizens can contribute to the development of responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making processes, as outlined in SDG 16.7. Furthermore, active political participation can help foster the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16.6.

For a long time, political participation was studied with a narrow focus on the election or voting system (Kim, 2016). Since Milbrath and Goel (1977), however, it has been separated into conventional (institutional) participation and unconventional (noninstitutional) participation (Verba et al., 1995). Examples of conventional participation include voting, budgeting, joining political parties, and meeting with politicians. Unconventional participation refers to activities performed outside institutional systems, such as petitioning, protesting, parading, and flash mobbing (Marien et al., 2010). Some South Korean researchers categorized political participation into accommodative participation (e.g., voting), active participation (e.g., meeting with politicians and/or the media), and remonstrative participation (e.g., participating in rallies) (Yi, 2006) and then regrouped it into institutional and noninstitutional participation (Yoon & Kim, 2019). These various forms of political participation can contribute to the realization of SDG 16 by promoting inclusive and participatory decision-making processes and fostering the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions.

According to previous studies on factors affecting political participation, older, educated, and better-off male citizens are associated with greater political participation (Kaid, 2004; Kwak, 2008; Lee et al., 2013; Milbrath & Goel, 1977; Thomas & Melkers, 1999). This finding indicates that the socioeconomic status of voters has a positive correlation with political participation. With respect to the internal factors of individuals, political participation is greater among those who are more trusting, more social, and more altruistic and those with a greater sense of duty than among their counterparts (Inglehart, 1977; Lee, 2007; Lee & Yoo, 2010). Other factors that affect political participation include personal interest or hope in politics and political trust (Lee & Lee, 2009; Mcleod et al., 1999). Understanding these factors can help policymakers and civil society organizations develop targeted strategies to promote inclusive and participatory political engagement, ultimately contributing to the achievement of SDG 16.

Social media and political participation

The development of information and communication technology (ICT) is blurring the line between the online and offline worlds and facilitating political activities and communications on virtual platforms (Ok, 2017). Against this backdrop, recent studies do not confine the concept of political participation to offline actions but expand it to include all activities pertaining to politics, from showing interest in political issues on the internet to participating in offline protests, voting, or volunteer activities (Ahn, 2010).

Past studies tended to focus on whether social media plays a positive role in political participation (Livingstone et al., 2007). Since the late 2000s, however, an increasing number of researchers have reported that the use of social media is strongly conducive to political participation (Baojun, 2014). Shirky (2011) argued that online-based political participation transforms the type of political participation from a vertical system to a horizontal system. In his research, Shirky predicted that the greater the number of nodes connected through social media, the greater the chance of social change or conversion into a democracy. In relation to the Arab Spring, many researchers noted the role of Facebook as a public place for discussion that successfully pulled off collective action (Diamond & Plattner, 2012; Marichal, 2013).

In this context, it seems safe to assert that social media serves as an important sphere for political participation. It has also become important for people to pay attention to online postings or views presented in the virtual space (Kwon & Kim, 2008). The act of paying attention to postings and articles shared on the internet is a more proactive and subjective behavior than engaging in casual dialogs offline and, in itself, an act of participating in public discussions (Song et al., 2006; Tremayne et al., 2007). Interest in online postings and/or articles can be transformed into collectivity and political influence through a bandwagon effect (Hwang, 2001; Kim and Rhee, 2006; Sundar et al., 2008).

Previous studies have consistently revealed that the greater the interest in online communication and the greater the degree of trust in information shared on the internet are, the greater the degree of political participation (Hwang, 2001; Hwang et al., 2006; Park, 2004; Tsfati & Cohen, 2005; Tai & Sun, 2007). Researchers have also argued that not only the information itself but also the type of medium that delivers the information affects the relationship between trust in the internet and political participation. For example, television increases interest in social issues, whereas newspapers increase the level of political participation among community groups and/or organizations (Scheufele et al, 2004).

Regarding the close link between social media and political participation, O’Sullivan and Carr (2018) coined the term “massperson” to refer to people on the internet. All these studies suggest that social media has been established as a new channel for political participation that can communicate a greater amount of information and implications (Castells, 2013). In this context, examining online communication is critical in analyzing the issue of political participation in the era of social media (Na et al., 2009).

Online social capital and political participation

Social capital can be understood as the potential to influence economic capital through interpersonal relationships (Coleman, 1988), and relationships among the members of society can mean trust, norms, and/or networks (Yoon et al., 2018; Putnam, 1995). Putnam (1993) distinguished bonding social capital, which is a network of those with similar social backgrounds, from bridging social capital, a network of those with dissimilar social backgrounds (Norris, 2002; Yoon, 2013). The advancement of the internet era has presented a turning point to studies on social capital, which began in the 1980s (Bourdieu, 1986; Coleman, 1988; Lin, 2002; Putnam, 2000).

In this era of ICT, researchers have shown that the concept of social capital, including bonding and bridging social capital (Lee, 2007; Song, 2006; Williams, 2006), can also be applied to the virtual space (Ellison et al., 2006; 2007; Wellman, 2001). On the basis of this understanding, Williams (2006) developed the internet Social Capital Scales (ISCS) to measure online social capital. In South Korea, Williams’s research was validated by Lee and Song (Lee & Song, 2019).

According to previous studies, online social capital is accumulated in a different manner by social stratum, including gender, race, age, and income (Norris, 2002), since social background affects individuals’ access to information and network size (Hsieh, 2012). Online social capital is found to affect other variables, including people’s psychological aspects and social relationships offline. It is also argued to have a positive effect on social integration (Chueng et al., 2011; Lee & Jung, 2014; Min & Joo, 2007).

A group of researchers who constructed online social capital with network size, information trust and norms to examine its impact on political participation confirmed the positive correlation of online social capital with offline political participation (Ahn & Ryu, 2007; Ryu, 2010; Song, 2005). However, their research is limited in that the variables of online social capital were not validated. Furthermore, the attitudinal components of online social capital, such as cooperation, community spirit, and orientation toward participation, have been overlooked (Kim, 2007).

In an effort to overcome such limitations, Williams (2006) validated his scale by adding attitudinal attributes to online social capital. Bridging online social capital consists of “outward looking, contact with a broad range of people, a view of oneself as part of a broader group” (Williams, 2006), whereas bonding online social capital includes “emotional support, access to scarce or limited resources, ability to mobilize solidarity, out-group antagonism” (Williams, 2006). Importantly, the application of these attributes varies by country and culture (Putnam, 2000; Song, 2014; Yoo, 2014). In this context, we apply the ISCS developed by Williams (2006) to political participation in South Korea and the United States and compare the two countries with the goal of better understanding the correlation between online social capital and political participation.

3. Methods

Participants

For this research, we conducted a survey using a structured questionnaire of general citizens aged 19 years or over in South Korea and the U.S. In South Korea, we recruited survey participants by dividing the country into 16 regions and using multistage stratified sampling in consideration of gender, age, and regional demographics. A surveying agency was chosen, and surveyors were trained in the purpose of the survey, how to answer survey questions, definitions of key terms, skills to approach survey participants, interviewing techniques, research ethics, and privacy protection laws. The survey participants were given a detailed explanation of the research and allowed to provide informed, voluntary consent to participate. The participants completed the survey questionnaire for approximately 20 minutes in relatively private surroundings. The survey was conducted from June to August 2017, and a total of 1,300 people participated. The survey questionnaire was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Yonsei University (Approval No. 7001988-201704-HR-185-01).

To obtain data regarding the U.S., we selected a survey agency and recruited survey participants through random sampling from the panels registered in the agency. The survey was conducted on the internet, and survey participants were allowed to complete the survey via a personal computer or mobile device. Before starting the survey, the participants were asked to provide informed, voluntary consent to participate. The survey took approximately ten minutes. For the English questionnaire, we hired a professional translator who is a native speaker of both Korean and English and verified the accuracy of the translation through back translation. Before the questionnaire was finalized, a pilot test was conducted with 20 graduate students to evaluate the appropriateness and difficulty of the questions. The survey was conducted from January to March 2018, and a total of 500 people participated. The survey questionnaire was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Yonsei University (Approval No. 7001988-201801-HR-100-03).

Measures

Demographics. The demographic variables included sex, age, region, education, and monthly household income. With respect to gender, the respondents were asked to choose between men and women. The regions were grouped into urban, suburban, and rural areas. Education was examined in terms of high school graduation (or GED) or below and college graduation or higher. Monthly household income was segmented into less than three million won, three to five million won, and five million won or over for South Korean respondents and less than USD 3000, USD 3000--5000, and USD 5000 or over for U.S. respondents.

Online communication. Using a 5-point Likert scale with one point indicating “Strongly disagree” and five points indicating “Strongly agree”, the level of interest in online communication was measured with the following statements: “I am interested in writing/articles on the internet/social media” and “I trust the information obtained through the internet/SNS.”

Online social capital. Online social capital was measured via Williams’s ISCS (2006). The survey included ten statements for bonding social capital, including “There are several people online I trust to help solve my problems,” and another ten statements for bridging social capital, including “Interacting with people online makes me interested in things that happen outside of my town.” As designed in the original scale, online social capital was measured on a 7-point scale with 1 point meaning “Strongly disagree” and 7 points “Strongly agree”.

Political participation. Using a 5-point Likert scale, as in the online communication factor, conventional political participation was examined with the statement “I participated in presidential election-related activities through my smartphone” and unconventional participation with “I participated directly in a rally through my smartphone.”

Statistical analysis

The responses of the survey participants were analyzed via SPSS Statistics 23.0. A frequent analysis and a descriptive analysis were performed on the demographic factors of the survey participants and major variables. Independent samples t tests and ANOVA were conducted to verify average value differences between conventional and unconventional political participation. In addition, a correlation analysis was performed between interest and trust in online communication, bonding and bridging online social capital, and conventional and unconventional political participation variables.

Finally, a hierarchical multiple regression analysis was carried out with the aim of determining the impact of these variables on conventional and unconventional political participation among South Koreans and Americans.

4. Results

Demographic characteristics of the participants

Table 1 summarizes the demographic characteristics of the survey participants. Among the 1,300 South Korean respondents, 659 (50.7%) were men, and 641 (49.3%) were women. In terms of age, 256 persons (19.7%) were 19 years old or in their 20s, 259 persons (19.9%) were in their 30s, 303 persons (23.3%) were in their 40s, 294 persons (22.6%) were in their 50s, and 188 persons (14.5%) were in their 60s or older. The average age was 43.89 years (SD=12.981). With respect to region, 575 persons (44.2%) were living in urban areas, 580 persons (44.6%) were living in suburban areas, and 145 persons (11.2%) were living in rural areas. With respect to education, 637 persons (49.0%) were high school graduates or below, and 663 persons (51.0%) were college graduates or higher. With respect to monthly household income, 288 persons (22.2%) earned 3,000,000 won or less, 579 persons (44.5%) earned 3,000,000–5,000,000 won, and 433 persons (33.3%) earned 5,000,000 won or over.

Among the 500 American respondents, 155 (31.1%) were men, and 343 (68.9%) were women. For age, 129 persons (25.9%) were in their 20s (including 19-year-olds), 159 persons (31.9%) were in their 30s, 71 persons (14.3%) were in their 40s, 64 persons (12.9%) were in their 50s, and 75 persons (15.1%) were in their 60s or older. The average age was 40.62 years (SD=14.655). In terms of region, 160 persons (32.2%) lived in urban areas, 229 persons (46.1%) lived in suburban areas, and 1108 persons (21.7%) lived in rural areas. With respect to education, 272 persons (54.5%) were high school graduates or below, and 227 persons (45.5%) were college graduates or higher. With respect to monthly household income, 132 persons (27.2%) earned USD 3,000 or less, 71 persons (14.7%) earned USD 3,000--5,000, and 280 persons (58.1%) earned USD 5,000.

Characteristics of major variables

With respect to interest in writing/articles on the internet/social media, South Koreans scored 3.61 points (SD=1.045), and Americans scored 3.37 points (SD=1.158) [Table 2]. The confidence level was 3.14 points (SD=1.005) for South Koreans and 2.99 points (SD=1.093) for Americans. This result suggests that the levels of interest and trust in writing/articles on the internet/social media are greater among South Koreans than among Americans.

In regard to bonding online social capital, people in the two countries presented similar levels, with South Koreans obtaining 39.20 points (SD=8.686) and Americans 39.80 points (SD=12.337). The level of bridging online social capital, however, was greater among Americans with 46.84 points (SD=14.134) than among South Koreans with 38.32 points (SD=10.837).

With respect to conventional political participation (e.g., voting), South Koreans earned 2.55 points (SD=1.082), and Americans earned 2.75 points (SD=1.311); with respect to unconventional political participation (e.g., joining rallies), the former scored 2.44 points (SD=1.141), and the latter 2.62 points (SD=1.380). In sum, Americans were more participatory than their South Korean counterparts in both conventional and unconventional political activities.

Differences in conventional political participation by sociodemographic characteristics

Next, we examined average value differences in conventional political participation by demographic characteristics [Table 3]. In the case of South Koreans, all variables except for gender showed significant differences. With respect to age, those in their 20s scored 2.86 points (SD=1.059), those in their 30s 2.72 points (SD=.996), those in their 40s 2.65 points (SD=1.114), those in their 50s 2.37 points (SD=1.056), and those in their 60s or older 2.03 points (SD=.983). This finding indicates that conventional political participation significantly increases as age decreases (F=21.911, p<.001). The scores by region were 2.54 points (SD=1.040) for urban dwellers, 2.67 points (SD=1.108) for suburban dwellers, and 2.12 points (SD=1.040) for rural dwellers: those living in urban and suburban regions are more participatory in conventional political activities than their rural peers are (F=21.911, p<.001). With respect to education, conventional political participation was significantly greater among those with college degrees or higher, with 2.70 points (SD=1.063), than among those who were less educated, with 2.40 points (SD=1.083) (t=-4.930, p<.001). In terms of monthly household income, those who earn three million won or more are significantly more participatory in conventional political activities than those who earn fewer than three million won: those with three million won or less obtain 2.19 points (SD=1.053), those with three to five million won obtain 2.69 points (SD=1.035), and those with five million won or more than 2.62 points (SD=1.112) (F=21.896, p<.001).

For Americans, there was no statistically significant difference in conventional political participation by gender, education, or monthly household income. As with South Koreans, however, significant differences were observed regarding age and region. The younger people are, the greater their degree of conventional political participation, with those in their 20s scoring 3.18 points (SD=1.317), those in their 30s scoring 3.13 points (SD=1.265), those in their 40s scoring 2.50 points (SD=1.218), those in their 50s scoring 2.18 points (SD=1.142), and those in their 60s or older scoring 1.94 points (SD=.998) (F=18.781, p<.001). A post hoc test confirmed that those in their 20s and 30 s were more participatory in conventional political activities than were those in their 40s or older. In terms of region, the level of conventional political participation was greater among urban residents than among rural residents: those living in urban areas earned 3.10 points (SD=1.362), those in suburban areas earned 2.60 points (SD=1.276), and those in rural areas earned 2.52 points (SD=1.198) (F=8.562, p<.001). According to a post hoc test, people living in urban areas showed greater conventional political participation than did their counterparts in suburban and rural areas.

Differences in unconventional political participation by sociodemographic characteristics

In this section, we examine average value differences in unconventional political participation according to the demographic characteristics of the respondents [Table 4]. With respect to South Koreans, variables excluding gender and region showed significant differences. When viewed by age, unconventional political participation significantly increases with age, with those in their 20s obtaining 2.79 points (SD=1.122), those in their 30s obtaining 2.58 points (SD=1.160), those in their 40s obtaining 2.47 points (SD=1.162), those in their 50s obtaining 2.30 points (SD=1.024), and those in their 60s or older obtaining 1.92 points (SD=1.069) (F=18.853, p<.001). According to a post hoc test, unconventional political participation was highest among those in their 20s, followed by those in their 40s and 50 s and then those in their 60s or older. The scores regarding education were 2.28 points (SD=1.118) for high school graduates or below and 2.59 points (SD=1.142) for college graduates or higher, indicating that those with a college education or higher tended to participate in unconventional political activities more than their less educated counterparts did (t=-4.899, p<.001). In terms of monthly household income, statistically significant differences were observed: those who earned fewer than three million won scored 2.18 points (SD=1.126), those who earned three to five million won scored 2.54 points (SD=1.131), and those who earned five million won or more 2.47 points (SD=1.138) (F=10.707, p<.001). A post hoc test confirmed that unconventional political participation was greater among those with a monthly household income of three million won or more than among those who earned less.

With respect to Americans, significant differences in unconventional political participation were found only with respect to age and region, as in conventional political participation. Younger people were more participatory in unconventional political activities, with those in their 20s obtaining 3.00 points (SD=1.472), those in their 30s obtaining 2.91 points (SD=1.332), those in their 40s obtaining 2.71 points (SD=1.391), those in their 50s obtaining 2.01 points (SD=1.204), and those in their 60s or older obtaining 1.84 points (SD=.926) (F=13.761, p<.001). According to a post hoc test, the level of unconventional political participation was greater among those in their 20s–40 s group than among those in their 50s or older. For regions, those living in urban areas earned 3.03 points (SD=1.446), those living in suburban areas 2.43 points (SD=1.299), and those living in rural areas 2.35 points (SD=1.309): those living in larger cities were significantly more participatory in unconventional political activities than were rural residents (F=11.185, p<.001).

Correlations among continuous variables for South Koreans

For South Koreans, conventional and unconventional political participation, the two dependent variables in this research, were significantly positively correlated with each other (r=.451, p<.001) [Table 5]. Conventional political participation was positively correlated with both interest (r=.237, p<.001) and trust (r=.210, p<.001) in online communication. It also had a statistically significant positive correlation with both bonding (r=.113, p<.001) and bridging online social capital (r=.266, p<.001).

Correlations among continuous variables for Americans

As observed with South Koreans, all variables regarding Americans were significantly positively associated with both conventional and unconventional political participation [Table 6]. Conventional and unconventional political participation had statistically significant positive correlations with each other (r=.665, p<.001). Conventional political participation was positively correlated with interest (r=.402, p<.001) and trust (r=.461, p<.001) in online communication, as was bonding (r=.398, p<.001) and bridging online social capital (r=.391, p<.001).

Effects on conventional political participation

To identify influential factors regarding conventional political participation, a multiple regression analysis was conducted by adding demographic factors (Model 1), online communication (Model 2), and online social capital (Model 3) in a hierarchical order [Table 7]. For South Koreans, the explanatory power was 7.7% for Model 1, 10.8% for Model 2, and 14.3% for Model 3. The Durbin-Watson coefficient was 1.413. No multicollinearity was observed, with the variance inflation factor (VIF) ranging from 1.007--1.623.

In terms of Americans, the explanatory power was 15.8% for Model 1, 28.4% for Model 2, and 31.9% for Model 3. The Durbin-Watson coefficient was 1.868. With VIFs of 1.063--1.907, there was no multicollinearity issue.

In Model 1, in which demographic factors were entered, both age and region were found to be significantly influential on conventional political participation. For both countries, the younger (β=-.216, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=-.365, p<.001 for Americans) and the more urban (β=.139, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=.110, p<.05 for Americans), the greater the level of conventional political participation. In both countries, gender, age, and monthly household income did not affect conventional political participation.

With respect to Model 2, to which online communication was added, conventional political participation grew as interest in and trust in online communication increased in both countries. The greater the interest (β=.122, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=.198, p<.001 for Americans) and trust (β=.095, p<.01 for South Koreans and β=.222, p<.001 for Americans) in online communication, the greater the level of conventional political participation.

With respect to Model 3, in which online social capital was included, conventional political participation was affected by bridging online social capital in both countries: the greater the bridging online social capital was, the greater the conventional political participation was (β=.215, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=.171, p<.001 for Americans). Bonding online social capital was not influential in either country.

Effects on unconventional political participation

Multiple regression analysis was performed by entering demographic factors, online communication, and online social capital in a hierarchical fashion with the aim of determining the factors influencing unconventional political participation [Table 8]. For South Koreans, the explanatory power was 5.8% for Model 1, 14.1% for Model 2, and 18.1% for Model 3. The Durbin-Watson coefficient was 1.435. With VIFs of 1.007--1.677, there was no multicollinearity issue.

For Americans, the explanatory power was 12.6% for Model 1, 29.8% for Model 2, and 35.0% for Model 3. The Durbin–Watson coefficient was 1.984. No multicollinearity was observed, with a variance inflation factor (VIF) of 1.059--2.022.

According to the analysis of Model 1, age in South Korea and both age and region in the U.S. were significantly influential with respect to unconventional political participation. In South Korea, the younger (β=-.213, p<.001) a country is, the greater the unconventional political participation; in the U.S., the younger (β=-.299, p<.001) and the more urban (β=.142, p<.01) a country is, the greater the unconventional political participation.

In terms of Model 2, both countries saw the level of unconventional political participation increase as interest in and trust in online communication increased. The greater the interest (β=.185, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=.244, p<.001 for Americans) and trust (β=.168, p<.001 for South Koreans and β=.245, p<.001 for Americans) in online communication are, the greater the unconventional political participation.

In Model 3, bridging online social capital in South Korea and bonding social capital in the U.S. had a statistically significant influence on unconventional political participation. The level of unconventional political participation was proportionately related to the level of bridging online social capital in South Korea (β=.226, p<.001) and to that of bonding online social capital in the U.S. (β=.187, p<.001).

Discussion

This research conducted surveys of 1,300 South Koreans and 500 Americans to determine the factors affecting political participation in both countries. Political participation was separated into two types: conventional (e.g., voting) and unconventional (e.g., joining political rallies). In addition to demographic factors, interest in and trust in online communication as well as bonding and bridging online social capital were analyzed in a hierarchical manner. The findings highlight the potential of social media and online social capital in promoting inclusive and participatory decision-making processes and fostering the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in the United Nations' SDG 16.

First, the factors affecting unconventional political participation differ between the two countries, highlighting the diverse ways in which social media and online social capital can contribute to the realization of SDG 16. Unconventional political participation was significantly influenced by bridging online social capital among South Koreans and bonding online social capital among Americans. This result is consistent with that of Keum (2010), who reported that the level of participation in social movements increased proportionately with bridging networks in South Korea but with bonding networks in the U.S. This finding indicates that social media, for South Koreans, is understood as a place to express their opinions (Scheufele et al., 2006). In other words, South Koreans actively express their political opinions in the online sphere, and such online engagement often leads to their participation in offline actions. This finding suggests that social media can serve as a platform for deliberative democracy in South Korea, contributing to the realization of SDG 16.7, which calls for responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making at all levels. By providing space for citizens to engage in political discourse and express their opinions, social media can help foster the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16.6.

In the case of the United States, the significant influence of bonding online social capital on political participation can be attributed to the tendency of Americans to participate in political activities on the basis of communities with which they have maintained continued relationships (Mutz, 2002). Compared with South Koreans, Americans have a greater tendency to use social media to strengthen their existing relationships (Bae, 2012). With respect to political participation, therefore, they obtain information from their existing social networks, which they trust more than unacquainted groups that could jeopardize the balance of existing networks. This finding highlights the importance of fostering trust and building strong communities to promote inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as called for in SDG 16.7. By leveraging the power of bonding online social capital, Americans can work toward creating more peaceful and inclusive societies, ultimately contributing to the achievement of SDG 16. Furthermore, the reliance on trusted social networks for political information underscores the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as outlined in SDG 16.6, to ensure that citizens have access to reliable and accurate information to inform their political participation.

Second, bridging online social capital was found to be influential in conventional political participation in both countries, highlighting its potential to contribute to the realization of SDG 16. This is in line with the findings of other researchers (Chang & Song, 2017; Ellison et al., 2007; Sinclair, 2012). These researchers argue that the open and participatory nature of social media enables the acquisition of information through new networks, in addition to the information obtained from existing offline networks. By facilitating the exchange of information and ideas among diverse groups, social media can help foster inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as called for in SDG 16.7.

In this research, the scores for bonding online social capital were similar between the two countries: 39.20 points (SD=8.686) for South Koreans and 39.80 points (SD=12.337) for Americans. In regard to bridging online social capital, however, Americans scored higher with 46.84 points (SD=14.134) than did South Koreans with 38.32 points (SD=10.837). In both countries, bridging online social capital had a positive effect on conventional political participation. This suggests that, compared with homogeneous factors, such as race, gender, age, and region, which previous research has found to influence political participation, the bridging online social capital accumulated in heterogeneous groups through interactions on the internet works better in the horizontal environment of social media (Granovetter, 1973; Kim, 2010; Lee & Jung, 2014). This finding underscores the importance of promoting inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as outlined in SDG 16.7, by leveraging the power of bridging online social capital to connect diverse groups and facilitate the exchange of information and ideas.

Another possible interpretation is that the scores for online social capital reflect differences in the perceptions of South Koreans and Americans (Lee et al., 2014; Williams, 2006). In particular, South Korean and American respondents may have understood the phrase "interacting with people" differently in one of the statements presented in the survey in relation to bridging online social capital. Compared with South Koreans, Americans in general tend to avoid discussing sensitive issues such as religion, politics, and personal history (Eliasoph, 1998). This finding highlights the need for effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16.6, to ensure that citizens have access to reliable and accurate information to inform their political participation. Furthermore, it underscores the importance of fostering inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as outlined in SDG 16.7, by creating safe and open spaces for dialog and discussion, even on sensitive topics, to promote social cohesion and build more peaceful and inclusive societies.

Finally, this research revealed that younger generations are more participatory in both conventional and unconventional political activities, highlighting the potential of social media to contribute to the realization of SDG 16. This may indicate that social media, which can be easily accessed through smartphones, can play a positive role in attracting young voters to political participation (Lupia & Philpot, 2005). In other words, social media enables easy access to political information, increases interest in politics, and provides various means of participation (Ok, 2017; Smith et al., 2012). This finding underscores the importance of leveraging digital technology to promote inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as called for in SDG 16.7, particularly among younger generations who are more comfortable with and reliant on social media for political engagement.

As shown in previous studies, this finding reflects that younger voters believe that their political actions on the internet influence the overall political process in real life and will continue to do so (Kang, 2013; Pinkleton & Austin, 2001). By engaging younger generations in the political process through social media, we can work toward building more peaceful and inclusive societies, as outlined in SDG 16. Furthermore, by providing accessible platforms for political information and participation, social media can help foster the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16.6, by empowering citizens to hold their governments accountable and demand greater transparency in decision-making processes.

To fully harness the potential of social media in advancing SDG 16, policymakers and civil society organizations should develop targeted strategies to promote inclusive and participatory political engagement among younger generations. This may include initiatives to provide digital literacy training, create user-friendly platforms for political information and participation, and encourage the development of online communities that foster dialog and discussion on political issues (Swart, 2023). By engaging younger generations in the political process through social media, we can work toward building more peaceful, just, and inclusive societies, ultimately contributing to the achievement of SDG 16.

The limitations and suggestions of this research are as follows. First, while we separated online social capital into bridging and bonding types and examined their respective effects on political participation, the effects of their interactions are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Future research will need to investigate the effects of their interactions and the complementary effects of the two types. Second, since both South Korea and the United States have relatively advanced ICT industries and social media cultures, the results of this research cannot be easily generalized to other countries. It is necessary to compare countries in terms of their levels of social media use.

Despite these limitations, this research is significant for its empirical comparison of political participation between South Korea and the United States, particularly in the context of SDG 16. It is particularly meaningful that the survey was conducted at a time when social media was reshaping the contour of political participation in both countries, offering new opportunities for inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as called for in SDG 16.7. It also investigated not only conventional political participation but also unconventional political participation, highlighting the diverse ways in which citizens can engage in the political process and contribute to the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as outlined in SDG 16.6. Furthermore, social capital was divided into bridging and bonding types and then measured via a new online-based measurement tool to understand their correlations with the two types of political participation, providing insights into how social media can be leveraged to promote social cohesion and build more peaceful and inclusive societies, as envisioned in SDG 16.

On the basis of the findings of this research, we make the following suggestions. First, given the differences in factors affecting political participation in South Korea and the United States, it is necessary to make efforts to understand how online activities affect politics in different cultures. This understanding can help policymakers and civil society organizations develop targeted strategies to promote inclusive and participatory decision-making processes, as called for in SDG 16.7, while taking into account the unique cultural and social contexts of each country.

Second, the immediacy of the spread of political information on the internet means that harmful information such as 'fake' news can be spread quickly. There needs to be a way to mitigate the downsides of using social media in political participation. This challenge underscores the importance of developing effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as outlined in SDG 16.6, to combat the spread of misinformation and ensure that citizens have access to reliable and accurate information to inform their political participation.

Finally, measures to use social media need to be devised to promote political participation among young voters. Given that political participation through social media is inversely related to age, promoting channels for political participation through the internet is advised. It is necessary to expand the scope of political activities, which are traditionally limited to elections and voting, to make available a diverse range of venues in which younger generations can share interest, participate, and raise their voices regarding politics. By engaging younger generations in the political process through social media, we can work toward building more peaceful, just, and inclusive societies, ultimately contributing to the achievement of SDG 16.

In conclusion, this research highlights the potential of social media to promote inclusive and participatory decision-making processes and foster the development of effective, accountable, and transparent institutions, as called for in SDG 16. By leveraging the power of digital technology and fostering inclusive online communities, we can work toward building more peaceful and just societies, where all citizens have the opportunity to participate in the political process and shape the decisions that affect their lives.

References

• Ahn, H. I. (2010). A study on the political participation and the political education in digital convergence circumstances. Theory and Research in Citizenship Education, 42(3), 95-125. https://doi.org/10.35557/trce.42.3.201009.004Article
• Ahn, M. G., & Ryu, J. H. (2007). An exploratory study of the internet political participation factor. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 23(1), 113-148.
• Aldrich, J. H. (1993). Rational choice and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 37(1), 246-278. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111531Article
• Bae, Y. (2012). A comparative study on the internet usage patterns in Korea and the United States: Focused on the use factor of service and the purpose of SNS use. Information Society & Media, 23, 100-126.
• Baojun, C. (2014). SNS use and participatory social capital in China: Focus on China university students. Social Science Research Review, 25(2), 79-102. https://doi.org/10.16881/jss.2014.04.25.2.79Article
• 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). Greenwood.
• 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/2082425Article
• Castells, M. (2013). Communication power (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.
• Chang, W. Y., & Song, K. J. (2007). The election and voters in the information era. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 22(1), 237-262.
• Cheung, C. M., Chiu, P. Y., & Lee, M. K. (2011). Online social networks: Why do students use Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 1337-1343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.028Article
• Cho, H. J., & Kim, G. H. (2019). An analysis of the social media fake news network in the 19th presidential election. Journal of Digital Contents Society, 20(8), 1553-1565. https://doi.org/10.9728/dcs.2019.20.8.1553Article
• Choi, Y. J. (2018). The social media’s effect on political participation: In search of the moderating variables. Journal of Political Communication, 49(1), 179-214.
• Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Supplement), S95-S120. https://doi.org/10.1086/228943Article
• Diamond, L., & Plattner, M. F. (Eds.). (2012). Liberation technology: Social media and the struggle for democracy. Johns Hopkins University Press.
• Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life. Cambridge University Press.
• Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2006). Spatially bounded online social networks and social capital. International Communication Association, 1-37.
• Ellison, N., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.xArticle
• Granovetter, M. S. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360-1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469Article
• Hsieh, Y. P. (2012). Online social networking skills: The social affordances approach to digital inequality. First Monday, 17(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v17i4.3893Article
• Huntington, S. P., & Nelson, J. M. (1976). No easy choice: Political participation in developing countries. Harvard University Press.
• Hwang, H., Schmierbach, M., Paek, H. J., Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Shah, D. (2006). Media dissociation, internet use, and antiwar political participation: A case study of political dissent and action against the war in Iraq. Mass Communication & Society, 9(4), 461-483. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327825mcs0904_4Article
• Inglehart, R. (1977). The silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among Western publics. Princeton University Press.
• Kaid, L. L. (Ed.). (2004). Handbook of political communication research. Routledge.
• Kang, S. Y. (2013). A study for construction and validation of political self-efficacy scale (PSES). Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 57(3), 294-323.
• Keum, H. J. (2010). The effects of social media on participatory social capital: A comparative study of bridging and bonding networks between Korean and American college students. Korean Journal of Broadcasting and Telecommunication Studies, 24(5), 9-46.
• Kim, D. H., & Ellison, N. B. (2022). From observation on social media to offline political participation: The social media affordances approach. New Media & Society, 24(12), 2614-2634. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820943263Article
• Kim, E. M., & Rhee, J. W. (2006). Rethinking ‘reading’ online: The effects of online communication. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 50(4), 65-94.
• Kim, G. D., Lee, J. M., & Lee, J. Y. (2019). Is unconventional political participation an alternative to voting? Korean Party Studies Review, 18(1), 29-64. https://doi.org/10.30992/kpsr.2019.03.18.1.29Article
• Kim, H. N. (2016). The diversity of political participation and psychological factors: Focusing on internal efficacy and trust in government. Journal of Korean Politics, 25(1), 81-110. https://doi.org/10.35656/jkp.25.1.4Article
• Kim, J. Y. (2007). Television news presentation of attitudinal components of social capital. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 51(4), 252-279.
• Kim, K. (2010). An exploratory study on the impacts of online activities about social capital formation of online and offline: Focused on the undergraduate. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 27(4), 5-44.
• Kim, Y. H. (2016). Community detection and hashtag recommendation using information diffusion in social media. Communications of the Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers, 34(6), 36-39.
• Kwak, H. K. (2008). A study on the neighborhood effect on community social capital. The Korean Journal of Local Government Studies, 11(4), 59-86.
• Lee, C. H., & Jung, N. W. (2014). The impact of social media use and motive on social capital: Comparison of open/closed social media. Korean Journal of Communication & Information, 65(1), 5-26.
• Lee, C. M. (2016). A comparative study on the U.S. and Korea’s new media democracy: Focused on utilization and transition of the internet and SNS. Social Science Research Review, 32(2), 167-187. https://doi.org/10.18859/ssrr.2016.05.32.2.167Article
• Lee, J. C. (2007). Political culture and voting behavior: Cognitive, affective, and evaluative orientation and participation in 5.31 local election. Korea and World Politics, 23(2), 93-121. https://doi.org/10.17331/kwp.2007.23.2.004Article
• Lee, J. Y., Park, S. R., Na, E. Y., & Kim, E. M. (2014). A comparative study of group orientation SNS use and online social capital among Korean and Australian youth. Journalism & Culture Research, 21(1), 1-33.
• Lee, K. W., & Song, I. H. (2019). Validation of the Korean version of internet social capital scale (ISCS). Social Science Research, 26(3), 7-38. https://doi.org/10.46415/jss.2019.09.26.3.7Article
• Lee, S. J., & Yoo, H. J. (2010). The effects of social capital on political participation. Korean Political Science Review, 44(4), 287-313. https://doi.org/10.18854/kpsr.2010.44.4.013Article
• Lee, S. J., Baek, S. G., & Han, E. K. (2013). Multidimensional gaps in political participation: Differences in education, new media, social networks and political talks. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 57(5), 113-136.
• Lee, W. T. (2007). Video UCC and presidential election campaigns in U.S. and Korea: Case studies and its political implications. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 22(1), 167-236.
• Lee, Y. N., Choi, E. J., & Kim, M. J. (2018). Analysis of the influence of presidential candidate's SNS reputation on election result: Focusing on the 19th presidential election. Journal of Digital Convergence, 16(2), 195-201.
• Lee, Y. S., & Lee, J. S. (2009). Research examining factors affecting individuals’ intention to participate in political activities. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 53(5), 316-339.
• Lévy, P. (2010). From social computing to reflexive collective intelligence: The IEML research program. Information Sciences, 180(1), 71-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2009.09.021Article
• Lew, S. J., Lee, H. W., & Lee, W. T. (2005). Online political activities and voting behavior of the university students: The case of the 17th national assembly election. National Strategy, 11(3), 141-169.
• Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action (Vol. 19). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815447
• Livingstone, S., Couldry, N., & Markham, T. (2007). Youthful steps toward civic participation: Does the internet help? In B. D. Loader (Ed.), Young citizens in the digital age (pp. 21–34). Routledge.
• Lupia, A., & Philpot, T. S. (2005). Views from inside the net: How websites affect young adults' political interest. The Journal of Politics, 67(4), 1122-1142. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2005.00353.xArticle
• Marichal, J. (2013). Political Facebook groups: Microactivism and the digital front stage. First Monday, 18(12). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i12.4653Article
• Marien, S., Hooghe, M., & Quintelier, E. (2010). Inequalities in noninstitutionalized forms of political participation: A multilevel analysis of 25 countries. Political Studies, 58(1), 187-213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9248.2009.00801.xArticle
• 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(3), 315-336. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846099198659Article
• Milbrath, L. W., & Goel, M. L. (1977). Political participation: How and why do people get involved in politics? Rand McNally College Pub. Co.
• Min, Y., & Joo, I. H. (2007). Social capital and its democratic consequences: Effects of media uses and social capital on political interest, trust, and participation. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 51(6), 190-217.
• Mutz, D. C. (2002). The consequences of cross-cutting networks for political participation. American Journal of Political Science, 46(4), 838-855. https://doi.org/10.2307/3088437Article
• Na, E. K., Lee, G. H., & Kim, H. S. (2009). Social implication of reading/writing online comments (replies) in representative democracy: Internet news comments, political trust, media trust, and political knowledge. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 53(1), 109-132.
• Noelle‐Neumann, E. (1974). The spiral of silence: A theory of public opinion. Journal of Communication, 24(2), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00367.xArticle
• Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing political activism. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610073
• O’Sullivan, P. B., & Carr, C. T. (2018). Masspersonal communication: A model bridging the mass-interpersonal divide. New Media & Society, 20(3), 1161-1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816686104Article
• Ok, I. N. (2017). Exploration of participation types for citizenship education. Theory and Research in Citizenship Education, 49(2), 55-88. https://doi.org/10.35557/trce.49.2.201706.003Article
• Owen, D. (1999). Cultural diversity and the conversation of justice: Reading Cavell on political voice and the expression of consent. Political Theory, 27(5), 579-596. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591799027005001Article
• Park, S. H. (2004). Political news use on internet: Use patterns and users’ characteristics. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 48(3), 436-465.
• Pinkleton, B. E., & Austin, E. W. (2001). Individual motivations, perceived media importance, and political disaffection. Political Communication, 18(3), 321-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600152400365Article
• Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton University Press.
• Putnam, R. D. (1995). Tuning in, tuning out: The strange disappearance of social capital in America. PS: Political Science & Politics, 28(4), 664-683. https://doi.org/10.2307/420517Article
• Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Rainie, L., Smith, A., Schlozman, K. L., Brady, H., & Verba, S. (2012). Social media and political engagement. Pew Internet & American Life Project, 19(2), 1-13.
• Ryu, J. H. (2010). A study of political participation in the cyberspace: Focusing on the online social capital and political capital. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 54(3), 5-26.
• Scheufele, D. A., Hardy, B. W., Brossard, D., Waismel-Manor, I. S., & Nisbet, E. (2006). Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship. Journal of Communication, 56(4), 728-753. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00317.xArticle
• Scheufele, D. A., Nisbet, M. C., Brossard, D., & Nisbet, E. C. (2004). Social structure and citizenship: Examining the impacts of social setting, network heterogeneity, and informational variables on political participation. Political Communication, 21(3), 315-338. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600490481389Article
• Seo, J. W., & Park, H. B. (2003). Use of internet and social capital: The possibility of formulating the social capital in virtual community. The Korea Association for Policy Studies, 12(1), 27-50.
• Shirky, C. (2011). The political power of social media: Technology, the public sphere, and political change. Foreign Affairs, 28-41.
• Sinclair, B. (2012). The social citizen: Peer networks and political behavior. University of Chicago Press.
• Song, H. J., Shin, S. M., & Park, S. G. (2006). Reading dissonant opinions on the internet and its effects on argument repertoire and tolerance. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 50(5), 160-183.
• Song, K. J. (2005). The social capital of cyber community and political participation by network. Korean Political Science Review, 39(2), 423-443.
• Song, K. J. (2006). A case study on building of the social capital in self-motivated citizen participation cyber community. Journal of Cybercommunication Academic Society, 19(1), 217-251.
• Song, K. J. (2014). Are SNS users participatory? Political participation types and SNS in the U.S. Korea and World Politics, 30(3), 59-94. https://doi.org/10.17331/kwp.2014.30.3.003Article
• Song, K. J. (2015). The social capital of social citizen in the network society. Korean Party Studies Review, 14(2), 167-194.
• Sundar, S. S., Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., & Xu, Q. (2008). The bandwagon effect of collaborative filtering technology. In CHI '08 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3453–3458). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1358628.1358873
• Swart, J. (2023). Tactics of news literacy: How young people access, evaluate, and engage with news on social media. New Media & Society, 25(3), 505-521. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211011447Article
• Tai, Z., & Sun, T. (2007). Media dependencies in a changing media environment: The case of the 2003 SARS epidemic in China. New Media & Society, 9(6), 987-1009. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444807082691Article
• Tefera, C. A., & Hunsaker, W. D. (2020). Intangible assets and organizational citizenship behavior: A conceptual model. Heliyon, 6(7). e04497https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e04497ArticlePubMedPMC
• Teorell, J. (2003). Linking social capital to political participation: Voluntary associations and networks of recruitment in Sweden. Scandinavian Political Studies, 26(1), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.00079Article
• Thomas, J. C., & Melkers, J. (1999). Explaining citizen-initiated contacts with municipal bureaucrats: Lessons from the Atlanta experience. Urban Affairs Review, 34(5), 667-690. https://doi.org/10.1177/10780879922184340Article
• Tremayne, M., Weiss, A. S., & Alves, R. C. (2007). From product to service: The diffusion of dynamic content in online newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 84(4), 825-839. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900708400406Article
• Tsfati, Y., & Cohen, J. (2005). The influence of presumed media influence on democratic legitimacy: The case of Gaza settlers. Communication Research, 32(6), 794-821. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650205281057Article
• Van Deth, J. W. (2014). A conceptual map of political participation. Acta Politica, 49(3), 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2014.6Article
• Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. University of Chicago Press.
• Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., & Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.
• Wellman, B. (2001). Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalized networking. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 25(2), 227-252. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00309Article
• Wellman, B., Haase, A. Q., Witte, J., & Hampton, K. (2001). Does the internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 436-455. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121957286Article
• Williams, D. (2006). On and off the 'Net: Scales for social capital in an online era. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 593-628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00029.xArticle
• Yi, Y. S. (2006). A research on impact of Korean social capital on the citizen's political participation behavior. The Korean Journal of Local Government Studies, 10(3), 25-43.
• Yoo, T. G. (2014). Relation between citizen participation and reciprocity in view of social capital theory: An analysis of the results of a survey of the citizens of Busan. The Korean Journal of Local Government Studies, 18(1), 465-495.
• Yoon, J. B., & Kim, S. J. (2019). Social capital and political participation. Social Science Studies, 27(1), 8-36.
• Yoon, J. B., Kim, J. J., & Jeong, H. O. (2018). An effect of officers’ psychological capital on organizational study of factors affecting Korean voters trust in political parties. The Journal of Social Science, 25(2), 152-174.
• Yoon, S. J. (2013). A network approach to the effects of social capital: Bonding vs. bridging. The e-Business Studies, 14(1), 203-224. https://doi.org/10.15719/geba.14.1.201303.203Article
• Zhuravskaya, E., Petrova, M., & Enikolopov, R. (2020). Political effects of the internet and social media. Annual Review of Economics, 12, 415-438. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-081919-050239Article

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by