從調節焦點理論檢視人們面對即時通訊軟體政治不一致的回應策略

Examining the Responding Strategies to Political Disagreement on Instant Messaging Apps: A Perspective of Regulatory Focus Theory

10.29843/JCCIS.202301_(44).0002

陳靜君(Ching-Chun Chen)

台灣網路調查 ； 即時通訊軟體 ； 政治不一致 ； 調節焦點理論 ； Taiwan Internet Report ； instant messaging apps ； political disagreement ； regulatory focus theory

資訊社會研究

44期（2023 / 01 / 01）

27 - 69

繁體中文;英文

當面對即時通訊軟體的好友傳了大量和自己立場不同的訊息，人們如何因應政治意見衝突？為探討人們在即時通訊軟體面對政治不一致所採取的回應策略以及其背後動機，本研究整合表達－迴避策略和激進－保守策略，發展即時通訊軟體政治不一致回應策略，並採用調節焦點理論，以2022年台灣網路報告的市話調查資料作為分析基礎（N=517），透過多項式羅吉斯迴歸分析，檢視促進焦點與預防焦點動機如何影響人們採取不同的回應策略。主要研究發現有兩個：第一，近八成台灣民眾在即時通訊軟體中最常採取保守迴避策略，依序是保守表達策略（佔8.3%）、激進表達策略（佔7.7%）與激進迴避策略（6.5%）；第二，促進焦點所主導的民眾偏好採取激進表達策略（如反駁對方）與激進迴避策略（如封鎖、隱藏訊息、刪除好友等），而預防焦點所主導的民眾傾向採取保守表達策略（如正面回覆）與保守迴避策略（如不理會）。在理論上有兩大貢獻：第一，提出即時通訊軟體政治不一致回應策略，可充實沉默螺旋理論、認知不和諧理論、人際衝突處理理論的內涵；其次，將調節焦點理論應用於政治傳播領域，擴充理論應用範疇。

How do people respond to political disagreement when they encounter inconsistent political information shared by friends on instant messaging apps? The current study proposes a quadripartite model of responding strategies to political disagreement on instant messaging apps based on two orthogonal dimensions-expressive vs. avoidant and aggressive vs. conservative. Using data from 2022 Taiwan Internet Report (N = 517), the current study examines how promotion focus and prevention focus influence individuals' adoption of responding strategies based on regulatory focus theory through multinomial logistic regression analysis. The results show that approximately eighty percentage of Taiwanese prefer to adopt conservative-avoidant strategies, followed by conservative-expressive strategies (8.3%), aggressive-expressive strategies (7.7%), and aggressive-avoidant strategies (6.5%). Moreover, our findings reveal that promotion-focused individuals are more likely to adopt aggressive-expressive strategies (e.g., refute others) and aggressive-avoidant strategies (e.g., block, hide message, and unfriending), whereas prevention-focused individuals tend to adopt conservative-expressive strategies (e.g., express supporting opinions) and conservative-avoidant strategies (e.g., ignorance). There are two theoretical contributions. First, the study proposes responding strategies to political disagreement by integrating spiral of silence theory, cognitive dissonance theory, and interpersonal conflict management theory. Second, the application of regulatory focus theory to political communication broadens the research on regulatory focus.

1. Barnidge, M.(2017).Exposure to political disagreement in social media versus face-to-face and anonymous online settings.Political Communication,34(2),302-321.
2. Barnidge, M.,Kim, B.,Sherrill, L. A.,Luknar, Ž.,Zhang, J.(2019).Perceived exposure to and avoidance of hate speech in various communication settings.Telematics and Informatics,44,101263.
3. Boulianne, S.,Koc-Michalska, K.(2021).The role of personality in political talk and like-minded discussion.International Journal of Press/Politics,1-26.
4. Cao, X.(2020).Revisiting the democratic implications of political discussion disagreement: With whom one disagrees matters.Journal of Information Technology and Politics,17(3),193-207.
5. Cappella, J. N.,Price, V.,Nir, L.(2002).Argument repertoire as a reliable and valid measure of opinion quality: electronic dialogue during campaign 2000.Political Communication,19(1),73-93.
6. Chan, M.(2018).Reluctance to talk about politics in face-to-face and facebook settings: examining the impact of fear of isolation, willingness to self-Censor, and peer network characteristics.Mass Communication and Society,21(1),1-23.
7. Chen, H. T.(2018).Spiral of silence on social media and the moderating role of disagreement and publicness in the network: Analyzing expressive and withdrawal behaviors.New Media and Society,20(10),3917-3936.
8. Cornwell, J. F. M.,Higgins, E. T.(2013).Morality and its relation to political ideology: The role of promotion and prevention concerns.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,39(9),1164-1172.
9. Cortes, K.,Scholer, A. A.,Kohler, A.,Cavallo, J.V.(2018).Perceiving relationship success through a motivational lens: A regulatory focus perspective.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,44(6),795-808.
10. Craciun, G.,Shin, D.,Zhang, J. Q.(2017).Safe driving communication: A regulatory focus perspective.Journal of Consumer Behaviour,16(6),e50-e60.
11. Eliasoph, N.(1998).Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life.Cambridge University Press.
12. Eveland, W. P.,Morey, A. C.,Hutchens, M. J.(2011).Beyond deliberation: New directions for the study of informal political conversation from a communication perspective.Journal of Communication,61(6),1082-1103.
13. Eveland, W. P.,Song, H.,Beck, P. A.(2015).Cultural variations in the relationships among network political agreement, political discussion frequency, and voting turnout.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,27(4),461-480.
14. Gao, Q.,Bian, R.,Liu, R.De,He, Y.,Oei, T. P.(2017).Conflict resolution in chinese adolescents’ friendship: Links with regulatory focus and friendship satisfaction.Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied,151(3),268-281.
15. Gil de Zúñiga, H.,Diehl, T.(2018).News finds me perception and democracy: Effects on political knowledge, political interest, and voting.New Media & Society,21(6),1253-1271.
16. Gil de Zúñiga, H.,Valenzuela, S.,Weeks, B. E.(2016).Motivations for political discussion: Antecedents and consequences on civic engagement.Human Communication Research,42(4),533-552.
17. Gill, H.,Rojas, H.(2020).Chatting in a mobile chamber: effects of instant messenger use on tolerance toward political misinformation among South Koreans.Asian Journal of Communication,30(6),470-493.
18. Gill, H.,Rojas, H.(2021).Communication mediation model predicting political participation among instant messaging app users: An OSROR approach.Communication Studies,72(3),490-512.
19. Goyanes, M.,Borah, P.,Gil de Zúñiga, H.(2021).Social media filtering and democracy: Effects of social media news use and uncivil political discussions on social media unfriending.Computers in Human Behavior,120
20. Hamstra, M. R. W.,VanYperen, N. W.,Wisse, B.,Sassenberg, K.(2013).Like or dislike: Intrapersonal regulatory fit affects the intensity of interpersonal evaluation.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,49(4),726-731.
21. Hayes, A. F.(2007).Exploring the forms of self-censorship: On the spiral of silence and the use of opinion expression avoidance strategies.Journal of Communication,57(4),785-802.
22. Hayes, A. F.,Glynn, C. J.,Shanahan, J.(2005).Willingness to self-censor: A construct and measurement tool for public opinion research.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,17(3),298-323.
23. Higgins, E. T.(2008).Culture and personality: variability across universal motives as the missing link.Social and Personality Psychology Compass,2(2),608-634.
24. Higgins, E. T.(1997).Beyond pleasure and pain.American Psychologist,52(12),1280-1300.
25. Higgins, E. T.,Cornwell, J. F. M.(2016).Securing foundations and advancing frontiers: Prevention and promotion effects on judgment & decision making.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes,136,56-67.
26. Hmielowski, J. D.,Hutchens, M. J.,Cicchirillo, V. J.(2014).Living in an age of online incivility: Examining the conditional indirect effects of online discussion on political flaming.Information Communication and Society,17(10),1196-1211.
27. Hopmann, D. N.,Bjarnøe, C.,Wonneberger, A.(2019).Responding to interpersonal political disagreement.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,32(1),66-88.
28. Jang, S. M.,Lee, H.,Park, Y. J.(2014).The more friends, the less political talk? predictors of facebook discussions among college students.Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,17(5),271-275.
29. Kim, Y.,Hsu, S. H.,deZuniga, H. G.(2013).Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits.Journal of Communication,63(3),498-516.
30. Kligler-Vilenchik, N.(2021).Friendship and politics don’t mix? The role of sociability for online political talk.Information Communication and Society,24(1),118-133.
31. Kligler-Vilenchik, N.,Baden, C.,Yarchi, M.(2020).Interpretative polarization across platforms: How political disagreement develops over time on Facebook, Twitter, and WhatsApp.Social Media and Society,6(3)
32. Klofstad, C. A.,Sokhey, A. E.,Mcclurg, S. D.(2013).Disagreeing about disagreement: How conflict in social networks affects political behavior.American Journal of Political Science,57(1),120-134.
33. Knobloch-Westerwick, S.,Kleinman, S. B.(2012).Preelection selective exposure: Confirmation bias versus informational utility.Communication Research,39(2),170-193.
34. Koopmann, J.,Lanaj, K.,Bono, J.,Campana, K.(2016).Daily shifts in regulatory focus: The influence of work events and implications for employee well-being.Journal of Organizational Behavior,37,1293-1316.
35. Kung, F. Y. H.,Kim, Y. H.,Yang, D. Y. J.,Cheng, S. Y. Y.(2016).The role of regulatory fit in framing effective negative feedback across cultures.Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,47(5),696-712.
36. Kwon, K. H.,Cho, D.(2017).Swearing effects on citizen-to-citizen commenting online: A large-scale exploration of political versus nonpolitical online news sites.Social Science Computer Review,35(1),84-102.
37. Lanaj, K.,Daisy Chang, C. H.,Johnson, R. E.(2012).Regulatory focus and work-related outcomes: A review and meta-analysis.Psychological Bulletin,138(5),998-1034.
38. Lee, A. Y.,Aaker, J. L.,Gardner, W. L.(2000).The role of interdependence in regulatory focus.Burns of Personality and Social Psychology,78(6),1122-1134.
39. Lobera, J.,Portos, M.(2022).The private is political: Partisan persuasion through mobile instant messaging services.International Journal of Public Opinion Research,34(1)
40. Lu, Y.(2019).Incidental exposure to political disagreement on Facebook and corrective participation: Unraveling the effects of emotional responses and issue relevance.International Journal of Communication,13,874-896.
41. Lu, Y.,Lee, J. K.(2021).Determinants of cross-cutting discussion on Facebook: Political interest, news consumption, and strong-tie heterogeneity.New Media and Society,23(1),175-192.
42. Mascheroni, G.,Murru, M. F.(2017).“I can share politics but I don’t discuss it”: Everyday practices of political talk on Facebook.Social Media and Society,3(4)
43. McGrath, A.(2017).Dealing with dissonance: A review of cognitive dissonance reduction.Social and Personality Psychology Compass,11(12),1-17.
44. Moy, P.,Gastil, J.(2006).Predicting deliberative conversation: The impact of discussion networks, media use, and political cognitions.Political Communication,23(4),443-460.
45. Mutz, D. C.(2002).Cross-cutting social networks: Testing democratic theory in practice.American Political Science Review,96(1),111-126.
46. Mutz, D. C.,Mondak, J. J.(2006).The workplace as a context for cross-cutting political discourse.The Journal of Politics,68(1),140-155.
47. Neubaum, G.,Cargnino, M.,Maleszka, J.(2021).How Facebook users experience political disagreements and make decisions about the political homogenization of their online network.International Journal of Communication,15,187-206.
48. Noelle-Neumann, E.(1974).The spiral of silence a theory of public opinion.Journal of Communication,24(2),43-51.
49. Rodrigues, D. L.,Huic, A.,Lopes, D.,Kumashiro, M.(2019).Regulatory focus in relationships and conflict resolution strategies.Personality and Individual Differences,142,116-121.
50. Rusbult, C. E.,Verette, J.,Whitney, G. A.,Slovik, L. F.(1991).Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical evidence.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,60(1),53-78.
51. Sassenberg, K.,Hansen, N.(2007).The impact of regulatory focus on affective responses to social discrimination.European Journal of Social Psychology,37(3),421-444.
52. Schmitt-Beck, R.,Lup, O.(2013).Seeking the soul of democracy: A review of recent research into citizens’ political talk culture.Swiss Political Science Review,19(4),513-538.
53. Shah, J. Y.,Brazy, P. C.,Higgins, E. T.(2004).Promoting us or preventing them: Regulatory focus and manifestations of intergroup bias.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,30(4),433-446.
54. Tumasjan, A.,Braun, R.(2012).In the eye of the beholder: How regulatory focus and self-efficacy interact in influencing opportunity recognition.Journal of Business Venturing,27(6),622-636.
55. Valeriani, A.,Vaccari, C.(2018).Political talk on mobile instant messaging services: a comparative analysis of Germany, Italy, and the UK.Information Communication and Society,21(11),1715-1731.
56. Vermeer, S. A. M.,Kruikemeier, S.,Trilling, D.,deVreese, C. H.(2021).WhatsApp with politics?!: Examining the effects of interpersonal political discussion in instant messaging apps.International Journal of Press/Politics,26(2),410-437.
57. Waterloo, S. F.,Baumgartner, S. E.,Peter, J.,Valkenburg, P. M.(2018).Norms of online expressions of emotion: Comparing Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and WhatsApp.New Media and Society,20(5),1813-1831.
58. Williams, A. P.,Vayda, E.,Cohen, M. L.,Woodward, C. A.,Ferrier, B. M.(1995).Medicine and the Canadian state: from the politics of conflict to the politics of accommodation?.Journal of Health and Social Behavior,36(4),303-321.
59. Wolak, J.(2020).Conflict avoidance and gender gaps in political engagement.Political Behavior,44,133-156.
60. Wu, T. Y.(2021).Proactive opinion expression avoidance about same-sex marriage on social media: Acceptance, reactance, and self-censorship.Mass Communication and Society,24(6),918-942.
61. Wu, T. Y.,Xu, X.,Atkin, D.(2020).The alternatives to being silent: exploring opinion expression avoidance strategies for discussing politics on Facebook.Internet Research,30(6),1709-1729.
62. Xiao, L.,Mou, J.(2019).Social media fatigue–Technological antecedents and the moderating roles of personality traits: The case of WeChat.Computers in Human Behavior,101,297-310.
63. 吳齊殷、陶振超、曾淑芬、吳泰毅、陳靜君、陳貞雅（2022）。《2022 台灣網路報告》。財團法人台灣網路資訊中心。https://www.twnic.tw/doc/twrp/202207c.pdf