Role of digital media as political communication tools in elections: A study on political science students at a public university in Ghana

Öz

Digital media is often understood through technical lenses that do not include the central issues of how and for what purposes they are used by citizens. Studies on social and personal factors that determine the use and outcome of digital political communication on elections are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to investigate how individual attitudes of cynicism, political efficacy, and elaboration influence the motivations of university students to use digital media as political communication tools in elections. The study addresses this gap by employing the mixed methods approach to survey 400 students and engage 40 students through focus group discussions. Findings indicate that notwithstanding that university students experience cynicism and reduced political efficacy due to distrust of and minimal feedback from political actors on political issues, the students are motivated largely by entertainment, communication, and social utility gratifications to deploy digital media for peer-to-peer political communication on elections. The implications of the findings are that political actors must engage in symmetrical communication with young people to foster a greater sense of political efficacy.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Digital media
• cynicism
• efficacy
• elections
• political communication

Seçimlerde siyasal iletişim aracı olarak dijital medyanın kullanımı: Gana’da bir devlet üniversitesindeki siyaset bilimi öğrencileri üzerine bir araştırma

Öz

Dijital medya genellikle, vatandaşlar tarafından nasıl ve hangi amaçlarla kullanıldıklarına dair temel konuları içermeyen teknik mercekler aracılığıyla yorumlanır. Dijital siyasal iletişimin kullanımı ve seçimler üzerindeki sonucunu belirleyen toplumsal ve kişisel faktörlere ilişkin araştırmalar sınırlıdır. Bu nedenle bu çalışmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin bireysel şüphecilik, siyasal etkinlik ve ayrıntılandırma tutumlarının, seçimlerde siyasal iletişim aracı olarak dijital medyayı kullanma motivasyonlarını nasıl etkilediğini sorgulamaktır. Çalışmada, 400 öğrenciye uygulanan anket çalışması ve 40 öğrenciyle gerçekleştirilen odak grup çalışmasını içeren karma metot kullanılmıştır. Araştırmaya göre, üniversite öğrencileri, siyasi meselelerde siyasi aktörlere güvensizlik duyması ve bu aktörlerden minimum geri bildirim alması nedeniyle hem şüphecilik hem de siyasi etkinliklerinde azalma deneyimlemektedir. Buna rağmen, elde edilen bulgular, öğrencilerin seçimlerde denkler arası siyasal iletişim için dijital medyayı kullanmaya daha çok eğlence, iletişim ve sosyal fayda tatminleriyle motive olduklarını göstermektedir. Bulgulardan elde edilen çıkarımlar, siyasi aktörlerin daha büyük bir siyasi etkinlik duygusu geliştirmek için gençlerle simetrik iletişim kurmaları gerektiği yönündedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Dijital medya
• şüphecilik
• etkinlik
• seçimler
• siyasal iletişim

Kaynakça

1. Ackermann, K., & Stadelmann-Steffen, I. (2022). Voting in the echo chamber? Patterns of political online activities and voting behavior in switzerland. Swiss Political Science Review, 28(2), 377-400. https://doi.org/10.1111/ spsr.12498. google scholar
2. Ahiabenu, K. (2013). ICTs influence on changing face of elections in Ghana: myth or reality? Accra: NED. Retrived from https://www.academia.edu/6488927. (Accessed 2 September 2023). google scholar
3. Amankwah, A. S. & Mbatha, B. T. (2021). Interactivity gratifications: Millennials’ motivations in using digital media technology for political communication about elections. Communicare: Journal for Communication Sciences in South Africa. 107- 127 (40). No.1. July, 1. https://hdl.handle.net/10520/ejc-comcare-v40-n1-a6.(Accessed 2 September 2023). google scholar
4. Bernardi, L., Mattila, M., Papageorgiou, A., & Rapeli, L. (2023). Down but not yet out: Depression, political efficacy, and voting. Political Psychology, 44(2), 217-233. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12837 google scholar
5. Bimber, B., & Gil De Zuniga, H. (2022). Social influence and political participation around the world. European Political Science Review, 14(2), 135-154. https://doi.org/10.1017/S175577392200008X google scholar
6. Botchway, T. P. (2018). Civil society and the consolidation of democracy in Ghana’s fourth republic. Cogent Social Sciences, 4(1), 1452840. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2018.1452840 google scholar
7. Carson, D., Gilmore, A., Perry, C. & Gronhaug, K. (2001). Qualitative marketing research. London: Sage. google scholar
8. Citrin, J., & Stoker, L. (2018). Political trust in a cynical age. Annual Review of Political Science, 21 (1), 49-70. https:// doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-050316-092550 google scholar

9. Ciuchita, R. Medberg, G., Penttinen, V., Lutz, C., & Heinonen, K., (2022). Affordances Advancing user-created communication (UCC) in service: Interactivity, visibility and anonymity. Journal of Service Management, Emerald Insight. ISSN:1757-5818. google scholar
10. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed). Routledge. google scholar
11. Coleman, Stephen & Morrison, D. & Svennevig, M.. (2008). Digital media and political efficacy. International Journal of Communication. 2. 771-791. google scholar
12. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed). Sage Publications. google scholar
13. Dambo, T. H., Ersoy, M., Eluwole, K. K., & Arikewuyo, A. O. (2022). Political marginalization of youth in nigeria and the use of social media to pursue inclusivity: A study of #nottooyoungtorun. Political Science Quarterly, 137(1), 99-123. https://doi.org/10.1002/polq.13312 google scholar
14. Dobra, A. (2012). The democratic impact of ICT in Africa. Africa Spectrum,1: 73 - 88. google scholar
15. Euzebios Filho, A., & Tabata, S. C. (2023). Political cynicism and political efficacy: Reflections on political representation and participation with students from a Brazilian Public University. SN Social Sciences, 3(2), 27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00599-y google scholar
16. Evans, W. D., Abroms, L. C., Broniatowski, D., Napolitano, M. A., Arnold, J., Ichimiya, M., & Agha, S. (2022). Digital media for behavior change: Review of an emerging field of study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19 (15), 9129. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159129 google scholar
17. Ferreira, P. D., & Menezes, I. (2021). Editorial: The civic and political participation of young people: current changes and educational consequences. Frontiers in Political Science, 3, 751589. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpos.2021.751589 google scholar
18. Frempong, G. (2012). What is happening in ICT in Ghana: A supply-and demand-side analysis of the ICT sector. Evidence for ICT Policy Action, ICT Policy Paper 4. Policy Commons google scholar
19. Geise, S., Heck, A., & Panke, D. (2021). The effects of digital media images on political participation online: Results of an eye-tracking experiment integrating individual perceptions of “photo news factors” Policy & Internet, 13(1), 54-85. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.235 google scholar
20. Gil de Zuniga, H., Diehl, T., & Ardevol-Abreu, A. (2017). Internal, external, and government political efficacy: Effects on news use, discussion, and political participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(3), 574-596. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1344672. google scholar
21. Grossman, G., & Slough, T. (2022). Government responsiveness in developing countries. Annual Review of Political Science, 25(1), 131-153. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051120-112501 google scholar
22. Grunig, J. E. & Hunt, T. (1984). Managing public relations. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. google scholar
23. Haridakis, P., & Hanson, G. (2009). Social interaction and co-viewing with youtube: Blending mass communication reception and social connection. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 53(2), 317-335. https://doi. org/10.1080/08838150902908270 google scholar
24. He, L., Wang, K., Liu, T., Li, T., & Zhu, B. (2022). Does political participation help improve the life satisfaction of urban residents: Empirical evidence from China. PLOS ONE, 17(10), e0273525. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0273525 google scholar
25. Holcombe, R. G. (2021). Elite influence on general political preferences. Journal of Government and Economics, 3, 100021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jge.2021.100021 google scholar
26. ICT4AD (2003). The Ghana ICT for accelerated development (ICT4AD) policy, Accra. Government of Ghana. http:// www.ict.gov.gh (accessed 15 August 2015). google scholar
27. Intyaswati, D., Maryani, E., Sugiana, D., & Venus, A. (2021). Social media as an information source of political learning in online education. SAGE Open, 11(2), 215824402110231. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211023181 google scholar
28. Jayswal, M. M. (2017). Comparative study on negative political advertisements with specific focus on attack and rebuttal television campaigns from indian perspective. Journal of Creative Communications, 12(2), 134-149. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973258617708373 google scholar
29. Jennings, F. J., Suzuki, V. P., & Hubbard, A. (2021). Social media and democracy: Fostering political deliberation and participation. Western Journal of Communication, 85(2), 147-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2020.1728369 google scholar
30. Jones-Jang, S. M., Kim, D. H., & Kenski, K. (2021). Perceptions of mis- or disinformation exposure predict political cynicism: Evidence from a two-wave survey during the 2018 US midterm elections. Digital media & Society, 23(10), 3105-3125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820943878 google scholar
31. Kachel, T., Huber, A., Strecker, C., Höge, T., & Höfer, S. (2020). Development of cynicism in medical students: Exploring the role of signature character strengths and well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 328. https:// doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00328 google scholar
32. Kaid, L. L., Postelnicu, M., Landreville, K. D., Yun, H. J. & LeGrange, A. G. (2007). The effects of political advertising on young voters. American Behavioural Scientist, 50: 1137 - 1151. google scholar
33. Kaushik, V., & Walsh, C. A. (2019). Pragmatism as a research paradigm and its implications for social work research. Social Sciences, 8(9), 255. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci8090255 google scholar
34. Kaye, B. K. & Johnson, T. J. (2002). Online and in the know: Uses and gratifications of the web for political information. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 54 - 71. google scholar
35. Knoll, J., Matthes, J., & Heiss, R. (2020). The social media political participation model: A goal systems theory perspective. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into Digital media Technologies, 26(1), 135¬156. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517750366 google scholar
36. Knudsen, E., Dahlberg, S., Iversen, M. H., Johannesson, M. P., & Nygaard, S. (2022). How the public understands news media trust: An open-ended approach. Journalism, 23(11), 2347-2363. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849211005892 google scholar
37. Li, H., & Chen, C.-H. (2021). Effect of the affordances of the fm digital media communication interface design for smartphones. Sensors, 21(2), 384. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21020384 google scholar
38. Lu, S., & Luqiu, L. R. (2020). Does political efficacy equally predict news engagement across countries? A multilevel analysis of the relationship among internal political efficacy, media environment and news engagement. Digital media & Society, 22(12), 2146-2165. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819888417 google scholar
39. Malloy, L. C., & Pearson-Merkowitz, S. (2016). Going positive: The effects of negative and positive advertising on candidate success and voter turnout. Research & Politics, 3(1), 205316801562507. https://doi. org/10.1177/2053168015625078 google scholar
40. Masciantonio, A., & Bourguignon, D. (2023). Motivation scale for using social network sites: Comparative study between facebook, instagram, twitter, snapchat and linkedin. Psychologica Belgica, 63(1), 30-43. https://doi. org/10.5334/pb.1161 google scholar
41. Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus Groups As Qualitative Research / David L. Morgan (2nd ed). Sage Publications. google scholar
42. National Communications Authority (2021). Quarterly Statistical Bulletin on Communications in Ghana, 5(4), 4th Quarter, October - December, 2021. (Accessed 29 August, 2023). google scholar
43. National Communications Authority, (2016). Broadband wireless access. https://www.nca.org.gh/assets/ Uploads/BWA-Data-December 2016.html (Accessed 2 September 2023). google scholar
44. National Communications Authority, (2016). Quarterly Statistical Bulletin on Communications in Ghana, 1(2). Accra, Ghana: National Communications Authority. https://nca.org.gh/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/ Quaterly-statistics-03-11-16-fin. (Accessed 2 September 2023). google scholar
45. Neuman, W. R. (1981). Differentiation and integration: Two dimensions of political thinking. American Journal of Sociology, 86(6), 1236-1268. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2778814 google scholar
46. Ngange, K. L., & Elonge, M. E.-M. (2019). E-democracy in africa: Assessing internet use by major political parties during elections in cameroon. Advances in Journalism and Communication, 07(03), 55-73. https://doi. org/10.4236/ajc.2019.73004 google scholar
47. Nissen, S. (2021). Political participation: Inclusion of citizens in democratic opinion-forming and decision- making processes. In W. Leal Filho, A. Marisa Azul, L. Brandli, A. Lange Salvia, P. G. Özuyar, & T. Wall (Eds.), Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions (pp. 665-675). Springer International Publishing. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-95960-3_42. google scholar
48. Norris, P. (2001). Political communication. In International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (pp. 11631-11640). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-043076-7/04364-3 google scholar
49. Oser, J., Grinson, A., Boulianne, S., & Halperin, E. (2022). How political efficacy relates to online and offline political participation: A multilevel meta-analysis. Political Communication, 39(5), 607-633. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/10584609.2022.2086329 google scholar
50. Park, C. S. (2019). The mediating role of political talk and political efficacy in the effects of news use on expressive and collective participation. Communication and the Public, 4(1), 35-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047319829580 google scholar
51. Pingree, R. (2007). How messages affect their senders: A more general model of message effects and implications for deliberation. Communication Theory, 17: 439 - 461. google scholar
52. Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research methods for business students (4th ed). Financial Times/Prentice Hall. google scholar
53. Schuck, A. R. T. (2017). Media malaise and political cynicism. In P. Rössler, C. A. Hoffner, & L. Zoonen (Eds.), The internationalencyclopedia of media effects (1st ed., pp. 1-19). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118783764. wbieme0066 google scholar
54. Scotto, T. J., Xena, C., & Reifler, J. (2021). Alternative measures of political efficacy: The quest for cross-cultural invariance with ordinally scaled survey items. Frontiers in Political Science, 3, 665532. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fpos.2021.665532 google scholar
55. Shahbaznezhad, H., Dolan, R., & Rashidirad, M. (2021). The role of social media content format and platform in users’ engagement behavior. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 53, 47-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. intmar.2020.05.001 google scholar
56. Shore, J. (2020). How social policy impacts inequalities in political efficacy. Sociology Compass, 14(5). https://doi. org/10.1111/soc4.12784 google scholar
57. Smith, K. B. (2022). Politics is making us sick: The negative impact of political engagement on public health during the Trump administration. PLOS ONE, 17(1), e0262022. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0262022 google scholar
58. Sobieraj, S. (2020). Credible threat: Attacks against women online and the future of democarcy. Oxford Studies Digital Politics Series, Oxford University Press. ISBN:0190089288, 9780190089283 google scholar
59. Song, H., Gil De Zuniga, H., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2020). Social media news use and political cynicism: Differential pathways through “news finds me” perception. Mass Communication and Society, 23(1), 47-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2019.1651867 google scholar
60. Sperber, E., Kaaba, O., & McClendon, G. (2022). Increasing youth political engagement with efficacy not obligation: Evidence from a workshop-based experiment in zambia. Political Behavior, 44(4), 1933-1958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-022-09794-2 google scholar
61. Valgarösson, V. O., Clarke, N., Jennings, W., & Stoker, G. (2021). The good politician and political trust: An authenticity gap in british politics? Political Studies, 69(4), 858-880. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321720928257 google scholar
62. Walker, C., & Baxter, J. (2019). Method sequence and dominance in mixed methods research: A case study of the social acceptance of wind energy literature. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 18, 160940691983437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919834379 google scholar
63. Weaver Lariscy, R., Tinkham, S. F., & Sweetser, K. D. (2011). Kids these days: Examining differences in political uses and gratifications, internet political participation, political information efficacy, and cynicism on the basis of age. American Behavioral Scientist, 55(6), 749-764. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764211398091 google scholar
64. Wimmer, R. D., & Dominick, J. R. (2011). Mass media research: An introduction (9th ed). Cengage- Wadsworth. google scholar
65. Zhang, W. (2022). Political disengagement among youth: A comparison between 2011 and 2020. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 809432. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.809432 google scholar