Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

The "Who" Matters: Types of Interpersonal Relationships and Avoidance of Political Disagreement

  • Ohio State University
  • Texas Tech University

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

115 Scopus citations

Abstract

Research consistently finds that we discuss politics most often with our strong ties (i.e., our close, intimate others). As our strong ties tend to be more politically similar to us than not, the conclusion is that everyday political discussions are overwhelmingly characterized by real or perceived political agreement. However, this scenario may paint only a partial portrait of everyday political discussion. Neglected is the distinction between politically similar discussion partners, on the one hand, and similarity of views expressed during conversation, on the other. Although our strong ties may be more politically similar to us than not, they may, paradoxically, be just the people with whom we are likely to express disagreement. Indeed, this study illustrates that although discussion with strong ties increases the probability of agreement, it simultaneously increases the likelihood of discussing disagreement.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)86-103
Number of pages18
JournalPolitical Communication
Volume29
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2012

Keywords

  • interpersonal relationships
  • political disagreement
  • political discussion

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The "Who" Matters: Types of Interpersonal Relationships and Avoidance of Political Disagreement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this