Sukunat spirali - Spiral of silence

The sukunat nazariyasining spirali a siyosatshunoslik va ommaviy aloqa tomonidan taklif qilingan nazariya Nemis siyosatshunos Elisabet Noelle-Neyman. Unda aytilishicha, ijtimoiy guruh yoki jamiyat a'zolarning fikri tufayli a'zolarni ajratishi yoki chetlashtirishi mumkin. Bu shuni ko'rsatadiki, shaxslarda qo'rquv bor izolyatsiya. Bu izolyatsiyadan qo'rqish, natijada fikr bildirish o'rniga sukut saqlashga olib keladi. Ommaviy axborot vositalari ham dominant g'oyaga, ham ta'sir qiluvchi muhim omildir odamlarning idroki dominant g'oya nima ekanligini. O'zining bahosi ijtimoiy muhit har doim ham haqiqat bilan o'zaro bog'liq bo'lmasligi mumkin.[1]

Fon

1974 yilda, Elisabet Noelle-Neyman, a Nemis siyosatshunos, "Spiral Silence" deb nomlangan taniqli modelni yaratdi. U "shaxslar o'zlarining fikrlarini bildirishga tayyor bo'lishlari, u jamoatchilik fikrlarini qanday qabul qilishlariga bog'liqdir", deb ishongan.[2] 1947 yilda Neyman va uning eri Germaniyada "Jamoatchilik fikri tashkiloti" ni tashkil etishdi. U 1978 yildan 1980 yilgacha "Butunjahon jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish assotsiatsiyasi" prezidenti bo'lgan.

Shelly Neillning so'zlariga ko'ra, "1974 yilda taqdim etilgan Spiral Silence nazariyasi [...] ba'zi guruhlar nima uchun jim turishini aniqlash uchun farazlarni o'rganib chiqadi, boshqalari jamoatchilikni oshkor qilish forumlarida ko'proq ovoz berishadi".[3] Sukunat nazariyasining spirali "jamoat masalasida ozchilikning nuqtai nazariga ega ekanligiga ishongan odamlar o'zlarining muloqotlari cheklanadigan fonda qoladilar; ko'pchilik nuqtai nazariga ega deb hisoblaganlar ko'proq gapirishga undashadi. "[4]

Nazariya shakllanishini tushuntiradi ijtimoiy normalar ham mikro, ham makro darajada. "Mikrot nazariya sifatida sukunat spirali fikrlarni ifoda etishni, odamlarni boshqarishni tekshiradi predispozitsiyalar - izolyatsiya qo'rquvi, shuningdek, demografik o'zgaruvchilar, masalan, masalan, odamlar haqida fikrlarini ochiq bayon etish istagiga ta'sir ko'rsatgan. qishloq xo'jaligi biotexnologiyasi."[1] Sukunat spirali so'l darajasida paydo bo'ladi, agar ozchilikni anglab etayotgan vakillari tobora ko'proq jim bo'lsalar. Fikrlar iqlimi to'g'risida jamoatchilik tushunchalari o'zgarishni boshlaydi.[1] "Boshqacha qilib aytganda, odamning o'z fikrini aytishni istamasligi, shunchaki hamma o'ylaydigan narsalarni idrok etish asosida, ijtimoiy darajadagi muhim ta'sirga ega."[1] Bir fikr qiziqish uyg'otganda, u olgan ta'sir miqdori ortib boradi va jamoatchilik uni ko'pchilik deb hisoblaydi. Keyin anglangan ozchilik, agar ular mos kelmasa, jamiyatdan ajralib qolish xavfiga va xavfiga duch keladi. Fikr tezlashib borishi bilan, qabul qilingan ozchilik ularning sukunatiga chuqurroq tushadi. Bu, qabul qilingan ozchilik endi kelishuv tasvirini taqdim etish yoki haqiqatan ham mos kelish orqali unga qarshi gapirmaguncha davom etadi va qabul qilingan ko'pchilikning fikri oxir-oqibat ijtimoiy normaga aylanadi.[5]

Spiral model

Spiralli model vizual tarzda tavsiflash uchun ishlatiladi nazariya. Agar uning fikri ko'pchilikning fikriga mos kelmasa, shaxs spiralga tushishi ehtimoli ko'proq.[5] Quyidagi qadamlar jarayon qanday ishlashini umumlashtiradi:

  1. Model shaxslarning jamiyat bilan birlashishga xos istagidan boshlanadi. Spiral paydo bo'lishi uchun ijtimoiy izolyatsiyadan qo'rqish kerak.
  2. Shaxsiy fikri tarqalayotganini payqagan shaxslar bu fikrni jamoat oldida ishonchli tarzda aytadilar. Boshqa tomondan, o'zlarining fikrlari tobora yo'qolib borayotganini sezgan shaxslar, jamoatchilik oldida o'z fikrlarini bildirishda o'zini tutib turishga moyil bo'ladi.
  3. Tarqalayotgan fikr vakillari juda ko'p gapirishadi, ikkinchi fikr vakillari esa indamay turishadi. Shu tarzda kuchaytirilayotgan fikr mavjud bo'lganidan kuchliroq ko'rinadi, bostirilgan fikr esa o'zidan kuchsizroq ko'rinadi.
  4. Natijada spiral jarayon bo'lib, u boshqa odamlarni fikrdagi o'zgarishlarni sezishga va bir fikr hukmron munosabat sifatida shakllanguncha, boshqa fikr orqaga qaytarilib, ko'pchilik tomonidan rad etilgunga qadar ergashishga undaydi. Oxiri spiral tufayli o'z fikrlarini ochiq aytmaydigan odamlar sonini anglatadi izolyatsiyadan qo'rqish.[6]

Bu jamoatchilik fikrini shakllantirish, o'zgartirish va mustahkamlash jarayoni. Birining gapirishga, ikkinchisining jim bo'lishga moyilligi bir fikrni tobora ustunroq qilib belgilaydigan spiral jarayonidan boshlanadi. Vaqt o'tishi bilan ushbu o'zgaruvchan in'ikoslar bitta fikrni ustunlik qiladi va ular suyuq holatdan qattiq me'yorga o'zgaradi.[6]

Bundan tashqari, Noelle-Neumann sukunat spiralini a deb ta'riflaydi dinamik jarayon, unda jamoatchilik fikri haqidagi bashoratlar ommaviy axborot vositalarida yoritilishi sifatida haqiqatga aylanadi ko'pchilik fikri ga aylanadi joriy vaziyat, va ozchilikning gapirish ehtimoli kamayadi.[7]

Epistemologiya

Ommaviy

Olimlar tushunchasi ustida uzoq vaqtdan beri bahslashib kelishgan jamoat ichida "jamoatchilik fikri "" Dan foydalanishjamoat "va" jamoatchilik "ko'plab raqobatdosh ma'nolarga xiyonat qiladi.[5] Uch ma'nosi mavjud jamoat. Bir ma'no - ochiqlikka e'tibor beradigan jamoatchilikning huquqiy tuyg'usi. Masalan, jamoat joyi yoki yo'l. Terimning ikkinchi ma'nosi jamoat huquqlarini ta'kidlaydi. Va nihoyat, jamoatchilik fikri jumlasida jamoatchilik bir-biriga bog'liq, ammo boshqacha ta'rifga ega deyiladi. Jamiyat, shu ma'noda, quyidagicha tavsiflanishi mumkin ijtimoiy psixologiya. Olimlar qonunlar, hukumatlar va sudlardan yordam so'rab hech qachon tashvishlanmasdan, shaxsning o'zini o'zi ustidan g'alaba qozonishidagi qoidalar, me'yorlar va axloqiy qoidalarni amalga oshirishda jamoatchilik fikri kuchidan hayratda qolishdi.[5]

Fikr

"Umumiy Fikr "bu nima Shotlandiya ijtimoiy faylasuf Devid Xum uni 1739 yilda nashr etilgan asarida shunday nomlagan Inson tabiatining risolasi. Ingliz va frantsuzcha "fikr" ning asosini kelishuv va umumiy his qilish egallaydi.[5] Fikr atamasini o'rganishda, Meinung nemis tilida tadqiqotchilar orqaga qaytarildi Aflotun "s Respublika. Platonnikida Respublika, taklif Suqrot fikr o'rta pozitsiyani egallaydi degan xulosaga kelish. Immanuil Kant fikrni "sub'ektiv va ob'ektiv ravishda etarli bo'lmagan hukm" deb hisobladi.[8] Qanday qimmatli fikr qoldirilishi mumkin; ammo, aholining yoki aholining bir qismining yagona kelishuvi bo'lishi taklif qilinganligi, hanuzgacha ko'rib chiqilgan.[5]

Jamoatchilik fikri

Atama jamoatchilik fikri birinchi bo'lib XVIII asr davomida Frantsiyada paydo bo'ldi. Jamoatchilik fikri ta'rifi vaqt o'tishi bilan munozara qilingan. So'z birikmalarining bitta tasnifini blokirovka qilishda katta yutuqlarga erishilmagan jamoatchilik fikri. Hermann Oncken, nemis tarixchisi aytgan

Kim jamoat fikri tushunchasini tushunishni va belgilashni istasa, u a bilan muomala qilayotganini tezda anglaydi Proteus, bir vaqtning o'zida minglab qiyofada ko'rinadigan va xayolparast, iktidarsiz va hayratlanarli darajada ta'sirchan, o'zini behisob o'zgarishlarda namoyon etadigan va biz o'zimizga mahkam ushlaganimizga ishonganimiz kabi abadiy barmoqlarimizdan sirg'alib o'tadigan mavjudot ... Suzib yuradigan va oqadigan narsani formulaga qamab qo'yish bilan tushunish mumkin emas ... Axir, so'ralganda, hamma jamoat fikri nimani anglatishini yaxshi biladi.[5]

Bu "g'oyalar tarixi muzeyiga tegishli bo'lgan fantastika; bu faqat tarixiy qiziqish bo'lishi mumkin" deb aytilgan.[5]

Ushbu taklifga zid ravishda, jamoatchilik fikri atamasi to'xtamayotgandek edi. 1970-yillarning boshlarida Elisabet Noelle-Neumann sukunat spirali nazariyasini yaratdi. U nima uchun Gitler va fashistlarning fikriga qo'shilmaydigan nemislar (ko'pchilik) uning rejimi tugaguniga qadar sukut saqlaganini tushuntirishga harakat qilar edi. Ushbu "ikki yuzli" xatti-harakatlar sukunat nazariyasining spirali sifatida tanilgan. Noelle-Neumann u haqiqatan ham jamoatchilik fikri nima ekanligini bilib oladimi, degan savolni berishni boshladi. "Sukunat spirali jamoatchilik fikri paydo bo'lgan shakllardan biri bo'lishi mumkin; bu yangi, yosh jamoatchilik fikri rivojlanib boradigan yoki shu orqali eski fikrning o'zgargan ma'nosi tarqaladigan jarayon bo'lishi mumkin".[5]

Amerikalik sotsiolog Edvard Ross tasvirlangan jamoatchilik fikri 1898 yilda "arzon" so'zidan foydalangan. "" Jamoatchilik fikri "bilan" hukmronlik fikri "tenglamasi uning ko'pgina ta'riflari orqali umumiy ipga o'xshaydi. Bu narsa jamoat fikriga yopishib olgan narsa odamlarni o'z xohishlariga qarshi ham harakat qilishga undovchi sharoitlarni yaratib berayotganligidan dalolat beradi."[9]

Ushbu atamaning ko'plab mumkin bo'lgan ma'nolari va ta'riflari o'rganildi. Olimlar jamoat ishlari masalalaridan iborat deb taxmin qilingan jamoatchilik fikrining mazmunini ko'rib chiqdilar. Olimlarning ta'kidlashicha, jamoatchilik fikri paydo bo'lishi "qo'rqitish uchun etarlicha dominant bo'lgan, ammo ularning fikri umumiy manfaatlarga mos keladigan harakatlarni qo'llab-quvvatlaydigan yoki qo'llab-quvvatlamaydigan intizomga" emas, balki ochiq jamoatchilik nutqiga bog'liq.[10]

Ular, shuningdek, kimning fikri jamoatchilik fikrini o'rnatishini ko'rib chiqdilar, jamoatchilik uchun dolzarb bo'lgan masalalar bo'yicha o'zlarini mas'uliyat bilan ifoda etishga tayyor bo'lgan jamiyat vakillari deb taxmin qilishdi. Olimlar, shuningdek, jamoatchilik fikri shakllarini ko'rib chiqdilar, ular ochiq ifoda etilgan va mavjud bo'lganlar; jamoatchilikka e'lon qilinadigan fikrlar, ayniqsa ommaviy axborot vositalarida. Ushbu atama atrofidagi tortishuvlar ikkala so'z atrofida aylanib, bu iborani hosil qildi.[5]


Neyman (1955) jamoatchilik fikri bo'yicha ikkita tushunchani taklif qiladi:

Ratsionallik sifatida jamoatchilik fikri: Jamoatchilik fikri yoki "ustun fikr" ongli ravishda oqilona jamoatchilik muhokamasidan so'ng paydo bo'ladi. Childs (1965) va Wilson (1933) "ratsional model siyosiy jarayonlarda qatnashishga tayyor va ishtirok etishga qodir bo'lgan ma'rifatli, oqilona jamoatchilik tushunchasiga asoslanadi", deb hisoblashadi. Umuman olganda, bu ijtimoiy o'zgarishlarni yaratish uchun siyosiy va zarurdir.


Ijtimoiy nazorat sifatida jamoatchilik fikri: Bu sukunat nazariyasining spirali asosida yotadi. Bu shuni anglatadiki, "sanktsiyalarni yoki ijtimoiy izolyatsiyani xavf ostiga qo'ymasdan bildirish mumkin bo'lgan fikrlar yoki izolyatsiyani oldini olish uchun bildirilishi kerak bo'lgan fikrlar (Noelle-Neumann 1983). Ijtimoiy tizimlar birdamlikni talab qiladi. Bunga erishish uchun shaxslarga ijtimoiy izolyatsiya tahdid qilinadi .

Ommaviy axborot vositalari va jamoatchilik fikri

Ommaviy axborot vositalarining ham jamoatchilik fikriga, ham jamoatchilik fikrini idrok etishga ta'siri "Sukunat nazariyasi" spiralida muhim o'rin tutadi. Ommaviy axborot vositalari va jamoatchilik fikrini shakllantirish o'rtasidagi munosabatlarga e'tiborni qaratgan dastlabki ishlardan biri Valter Lippmann 1923 yilda nashr etilgan "Jamoatchilik fikri" kitobi.[11] Lippmanning ommaviy axborot vositalarining ta'siriga oid g'oyalari Spiral Silence nazariyasining paydo bo'lishiga ta'sir ko'rsatdi. Spiral nazariyani yaratishda Nelle-Neyman "o'quvchi faqat ommaviy axborot vositalari tomonidan yaratilgan ongdan foydalangan holda dunyoni to'ldirishi va tushuntirishi mumkin" deb ta'kidlaydi.[9]

Kun tartibini belgilash nazariyasi Bu Nelle-Neyman tomonidan qurilgan yana bir asar, chunki u ommaviy axborot vositalarining jamoatchilik fikriga ta'sirini tavsiflaydi. Kun tartibini belgilash nazariyasi masalaning ommaviy ahamiyati uning ommaviy axborot vositalaridagi keskinligiga bog'liqligini tasdiqlash orqali ommaviy axborot vositalari va jamoatchilik fikri o'rtasidagi munosabatni tavsiflaydi.[12] Ommaviy axborot vositalari kun tartibini belgilash bilan bir qatorda, kun tartibidan joy olishga intilayotgan boshqa hodisalar bilan doimiy kurash olib borish orqali eng muhim muammolarni aniqlaydilar.[9] Ommaviy axborot vositalari "yolg'on-inqiroz" va "yolg'on-yangiliklarni" yaratish orqali ushbu yangiliklar alternativalari bilan kurashmoqda.[9]

Aloqa vositasi sifatida ommaviy axborot vositalarining xususiyatlari odamlarning o'z fikrlarini jamoatchilik fikri nuqtai nazaridan anglashiga yanada ta'sir qiladi.[9] Noelle-Neymanning fikriga ko'ra, ommaviy axborot vositalari "bir tomonlama, bilvosita, ommaviy aloqa shakli bo'lib, insonning eng tabiiy aloqasi bo'lgan uch narsaga zid bo'lgan suhbat."[9] Muammo ommaviy axborot vositalariga tegsa va taniqli ekanligi isbotlansa, odatda ustun nuqtai nazar paydo bo'ladi. Ommaviy axborot vositalarining ushbu xususiyatlari insonning individual g'oyalarini yanada kuchaytiradi.

Ba'zilar esa media aloqa nazariyalari passiv deb hisoblang tomoshabinlar kabi Gipodermik igna modeli,[13] spiral model "ommaviy axborot vositalarini shaxsiy va ijtimoiy maqsadlari nuqtai nazaridan iste'mol qiladigan" faol auditoriyani o'z ichiga oladi.[13] "Ommaviy axborot vositalaridan olingan bilimlar odamlarga o'zlarining fikrlarini bildirishlari va o'zlarining pozitsiyalari uchun asoslarini taklif qilishlari uchun o'q-dorilarni taklif qilishi mumkin."[14] Xo va boshq. "ommaviy axborot vositalariga katta miqdordagi e'tiborni qaratgan shaxslar orasida, izolyatsiya qo'rquvi past bo'lganlar, o'zlarining fikri uchun asoslanishni izolyatsiyadan qo'rqadiganlarga qaraganda sezilarli darajada ko'proq taklif qilishgan".[14]

Noelle-Neyman ommaviy axborot vositalarini "Sukunat spirali" nazariyasini shakllantirishda muhim deb biladi, ba'zi bir olimlar esa o'zlarining ijtimoiy muhitidagi hukmron g'oya ommaviy axborot vositalarining idrok etilayotgan ijtimoiy me'yor sifatida taklif etayotgan ustun g'oyasini bosib o'tadimi yoki yo'qmi deb ta'kidlaydilar.[15][16] Ba'zi empirik tadqiqotlar ushbu istiqbolga mos keladi; degan taklifni "mikroiqlim "shaxsning ommaviy axborot vositalarining ta'sirini engib chiqishi.[16] Boshqa maqolalar shuni ko'rsatadiki, boshqalar bilan suhbatlashish fikrlar iqlimini tushunishning asosiy usuli hisoblanadi.[17]

Ijtimoiy media Spiral Silence nazariyasining rivojlanishiga hissa qo'shdi. Tadqiqotchilar Chaudhry & Gruzd (2019) ijtimoiy tarmoqlar ushbu nazariyani haqiqatan ham zaiflashtirganligini aniqladilar. Ushbu nazariya shuni ko'rsatadiki, ozchilik izolyatsiya qo'rquvi tufayli o'z fikrlarini ifoda etishda noqulaydir, ammo "vokal ozchilik ushbu ommabop nazariyaning onlayn sharoitida tushuntirish kuchini shubha ostiga qo'yib, yoqimsiz fikrlarni ifoda etishda qulaydir".[18]

Idrok

"Sukunat spirali" nazariyasi idrokka asoslanadi, chunki odamlar doimiy ravishda atrof-muhitni ko'zdan kechirish uchun iqlimni baholaydilar. Qabul qilish muhim, chunki bu fikrlar shaxslarning xulq-atvori va qarashlariga ta'sir qiladi.[2] Qanday qilib buni odamlar qilishi mumkin? Sherif (1967) jismoniy shaxslar o'tgan tajribaga asoslangan ma'lumot bazalaridan foydalanadilar - "ijtimoiy muhit yangi ma'lumotlarni talqin qilish uchun ma'lumot bazasi sifatida jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish uchun muhim ta'sir ko'rsatmoqda". Gestalt psixologiyasiga ko'ra, shaxslarga "mos keladigan ma'lumotnoma bazasida uni talqin qilish uchun" ma'lumot taqdim etilganda, ular ijtimoiy muhitda noqulay (masalan, xulq-atvor ta'sirida).

Taxminlar

Izolyatsiya qo'rquvi

Izolyatsiya qo'rquvi - sukunat spiralini tezlashtiradigan markazdan qochiruvchi kuch.[19] Aslida, odamlar ijtimoiy yakkalanib qolishdan qo'rqishadi va shu bilan psixolog ko'rsatganidek, bunday oqibatlarga olib kelmaslik uchun choralar ko'rishadi Sulaymon Asch ichida Asch muvofiqligi tajribalari.[20] Odamlar o'zlarining fikrlarini boshqalarga ifoda etish o'rniga ustun fikrlar bilan rozi bo'lish orqali o'zlarini yanada qulay his qilishadi.[1]

Iqlimni baholash

Ushbu taxmin yakkalanib qolmaslik uchun va mashhurlik va qadr-qimmatni yo'qotmaslik uchun odamlar doimo o'z atroflarini diqqat bilan kuzatib borishni taklif qiladi. Ular qaysi fikrlar va xulq-atvor usullari keng tarqalganligini, qaysi fikrlar va xulq-atvor usullari tobora ommalashib borayotganligini aniqlashga harakat qilishadi. Ular o'zini tutishadi va jamoat joylarida o'zlarini ifoda etadilar. Keyin, ular ko'pchilikni yoki yo'qligini aniqlashga harakat qilishadi: jamoatchilik fikri ular bilan rozi bo'lishga moyil bo'ladimi. Agar ular ozchilikni his qilsalar, ular sukut saqlashga moyil.[21]

Kvazi-statistik ma'no

"Oltinchi tuyg'u" deb ta'riflangan shaxslar "tug'ma qobiliyat" yoki kvazi-statistik tuyg'u sifatida tavsiflanadigan narsadan foydalanadilar jamoatchilik fikri.[22] Odamlar boshqalar nimani o'ylayotganini his qilishlari va aniqlashlari mumkin deb o'ylashadi.[1]

The Ommaviy axborot vositalari dominant fikrni aniqlashda katta rol o'ynaydi, chunki bizning bevosita kuzatuvimiz aholining ozgina qismi bilan cheklangan. Ommaviy axborot vositalari jamoatchilik fikri qanday tasvirlanishiga juda katta ta'sir ko'rsatadi va bu shaxsning jamoat fikri qayerda ekanligi haqidagi tasavvuriga ta'sir qilishi mumkin.[23]

Plyuralistik johillik

Plyuralistik johillik ba'zi hollarda paydo bo'lishi mumkin, bu ozchilikning fikrini norma sifatida qabul qilinishiga olib keladi. Guruh a'zolari normani xususiy ravishda rad etishi mumkin, ammo boshqa guruh a'zolari buni qabul qiladi deb yolg'on taxmin qilishlari mumkin. Ushbu hodisa guruhni normani ushlab turishiga olib kelishi mumkin.[24]

Jamoatchilik fikri masalalarini baholash

Jamoatchilik fikrini baholashimiz, gapirishga qaror qilishimizga ta'sir qiladi. Fikrlar nisbatan aniq va harakatsiz bo'lsa - urf-odatlar, masalan, jamoat oldida bu fikrni bildirishi yoki unga muvofiq harakat qilishi yoki izolyatsiya xavfini tug'dirishi kerak. Aksincha, fikrlar o'zgaruvchan yoki bahsli bo'lgan joyda, shaxs qaysi fikrni izolyatsiya qilmasdan aytishi mumkinligini aniqlashga harakat qiladi. Shaxslar o'zlarining fikrlarini ustun yoki ko'tarilayotgan deb bilganlarida, o'z fikrlari va munosabatlarini ommaviy ravishda ifoda etishga moyildirlar. Aksincha, shaxslar o'zlarining fikri unchalik mashhur emasligini yoki mashhurligini yo'qotayotganini sezsalar, ular uni jamoatchilik oldida kamroq gapirishadi. Biror kishining nima qilishga qaror qilgani atrofdagi jamiyatga ta'sir qiladi.[1]

Vokal ozchilik va hardcore

Nazariya a ni tushuntiradi vokal ozchilik (.ning to‘ldiruvchisi jim ko'pchilik ) yuqori ma'lumotli yoki boyligi ko'proq odamlar va izolyatsiyadan qo'rqmaydigan boshqa bir necha otliq shaxslar, jamoatchilik fikridan qat'i nazar, o'z fikrlarini bildirishlari mumkin.[25] Bundan tashqari, ushbu ozchilik o'zgarishning zarur omilidir, aksincha, mos keluvchi ko'pchilik barqarorlikning zarur omili bo'lib, ikkalasi ham evolyutsiya mahsulidir. Izolyatsiya tahdidlariga qarshi spiralning tepasida qoladigan vokal ozchilik mavjud.

Ushbu nazariya ushbu vokal ozchiliklarni hardcore deb ataydi nomuvofiq yoki avangard. Hardcore nonkonformistlar "o'z e'tiqodlari uchun rad etilgan va ochiq gapirish bilan yo'qotadigan narsalari bo'lmagan odamlar".[19] Hardcore ko'pchilik fikrini qayta tuzish qobiliyatiga ega. Da avangard bu "yakka-yakka ozchilikdagi intellektuallar, san'atkorlar va islohotchilar, ular zamondan ilgarilab ketganiga amin bo'lganliklari uchun o'z fikrlarini bildirmoqdalar".[19]

Nazariyani qo'llash

Sukunat spirali ommaviy madaniyat hodisalari haqida gapirishdan tortib, turli mavzular bo'yicha tushuncha olib keldi,[26] chekishga.[27] Sukunat spirali bahsli masalalarda va axloqiy tarkibiy qismlarga ega bo'lish ehtimoli ko'proq ekanligini hisobga olsak,[9] kabi ko'plab olimlar nazariyani bahsli mavzularga tatbiq etishgan, masalan abort,[28] tasdiqlovchi harakat,[29] va o'lim jazosi.[30]

Xoch madaniy tadqiqotlar

Sukunat nazariyasi spiralidan oldin mavjud bo'lgan adabiyot ijtimoiy o'rtasidagi munosabatni taklif qiladi muvofiqlik va madaniyat, muloqot olimlarini o'tkazishga undash madaniyatlararo tahlil nazariya. Sohasidagi olimlar psixologiya Xususan, ilgari ko'pchilik fikriga muvofiqlik bilan bog'liq madaniy tafovutga murojaat qilingan.[31] Yaqinda o'tkazilgan tadqiqotlar muvofiqlik va madaniyat o'rtasidagi bog'liqlikni tasdiqlaydi: a meta-tahlil bilan bog'liq Asch muvofiqligi tajribalari, masalan, buni taklif qiling kollektivist madaniyatlar individualizm madaniyatiga qaraganda ko'proq muvofiqlikni namoyon qiladi.[32]

Qo'shma Shtatlar va Tayvan

Sukunat spiralining xoch madaniy sinovi Huiping Huang tomonidan o'tkazilgan telefon anketasi natijalarini tahlil qiladi Tayvan va Qo'shma Shtatlar. Sinov qilingan gipotezalar quyidagilarga bo'lgan ishonch edi Qo'shma Shtatlar bu "individualistik" jamiyat, esa Tayvan bu "kollektivist "jamiyat. Bu shuni ko'rsatdiki, sukunat spirali Qo'shma Shtatlarda kamroq faollashadi, chunki shaxslar o'zlarining shaxsiy maqsadlariga ko'proq e'tibor berishadi. Ular" men "identifikatorini" biz "identifikatori o'rniga qo'yishadi va intilishadi Shaxsiy muvaffaqiyat uchun.Shuning uchun ular ozchilikni tashkil etishidan qat'i nazar, ular ko'proq gapirishi mumkin degan faraz qilingan edi Boshqa tomondan, Tayvanda shaxslar jamoaviy maqsadga ko'proq e'tibor berishlari bashorat qilingan edi, shuning uchun ular Tanglik va mojarolardan qochish umidida ko'pchilik ta'siriga mos keladi, shuningdek, tadqiqot natijasini sinab ko'rdi motivlar, shu jumladan o'z-o'zini samaradorligi va o'z-o'ziga ishonch.

Telefon orqali so'rovlar o'tkazildi; Amerika Qo'shma Shtatlari fuqarolari Amerikaning ishtiroki borasida so'roq qilindi Somali va Tayvan fuqarolari to'g'ridan-to'g'ri prezident saylovlari o'tkazilishi mumkinligi to'g'risida. Ikkala masala ham siyosat va inson huquqlariga bag'ishlangan va shuning uchun ularni taqqoslash mumkin edi. Respondentlardan kelgusida ushbu masala bo'yicha o'zlari, oila a'zolari va do'stlari, ommaviy axborot vositalari, jamiyat va jamiyat toifalariga nisbatan "yoqimtoy", "betaraf" yoki "qarshi" bo'lishni so'rashdi. Shuningdek, o'lchovlar o'tkazildi individualizm va kollektivizm konstruktsiyalar va berilgan fikrlarni tasdiqlash uchun mos ravishda 1-2 va 1-5 o'lchov asosida "fikr bildirmaslik motivlari".

Natijalar dastlabki gipotezani qo'llab-quvvatlaganligini ko'rsatdi. Umuman olganda, Amerikaliklar gapirishdan ko'ra ko'proq gapirish ehtimoli ko'proq edi Tayvanliklar. Ko'pchilik bilan nomuvofiqlik Tayvanliklarning gapirishga bo'lgan turtkisini pasaytirdi (va ular kollektivistik ballari yuqoriroq edi), ammo amerikaliklarga unchalik ta'sir ko'rsatmadi. Tayvanda jamiyatni kelajakdagi qo'llab-quvvatlashi va ishonchi o'z fikrini bildirishda o'xshashlikda katta rol o'ynadi va sukunat spiralining faollashishi amalda. Qo'shma Shtatlarda, ular ko'proq individual bo'lganligi sababli, ozchilik yoki nomuvofiq guruh bo'lsa, ular ko'proq gapirishi mumkin deb taxmin qilingan edi. Biroq, bu haqiqat emas edi, ammo Xuangning ta'kidlashicha, tanlangan masala bevosita keng tarqalmagan bo'lishi mumkin va shuning uchun ular "ko'pchilik fikriga o'z e'tirozlarini bildirishni keraksiz" deb hisoblashgan. O'z-o'zini samaradorligini etishmasligi ikkala mamlakatda ham ochiq gapirishga olib keldi.[33]

Bask millatchiligi

Bask millatchiligi va sukunat spirali - bu Spenser va Kroucherning jamoatchilik idrokini tahlil qiladigan maqolasi ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, jangari bo'lginchi guruh) Ispaniya va Frantsiyada. Ushbu tadqiqot yuqoridagi kabi o'tkazildi, Ispaniya va Frantsiyadan kelgan basklar ETA-ni qo'llab-quvvatlashlari haqida so'roq qilindi. Ularga "Siz poyezdda notanish odam bilan ETA haqida suhbat qurishingiz ehtimoli qanday?" Kabi savollar berildi. ETA mavjud bo'lgan ikki mintaqaning madaniy farqlari hisobga olingan.

Natijalar sukunat spirali nazariyasini qo'llab-quvvatladi. Guruhning o'ta yoqimsiz fikri bo'lsa-da, uni to'xtatish uchun norozilik yo'q edi. Jismoniy shaxslar o'z fikrlarini basklar bilan ko'proq gaplashishlarini da'vo qilishdi va o'zlarining do'stlariga nisbatan "izolyatsiya qilish qo'rquvi" borligini ta'kidlashdi. Basklar. Bundan tashqari, so'roq qilingan ispaniyaliklar zo'ravonlik harakatlariga ko'proq yaqin bo'lganliklari sababli jim bo'lishlari mumkin edi.[34]

Sinfdagi tushunchalar

Xenson va Denker tomonidan olib borilgan bitta tadqiqot "sukunatchi xatti-harakatlar haqidagi tasavvurlarni o'rganadi, siyosiy mansublik va siyosiy farqlar universitet haqidagi tasavvurlarga mos keladi sinf iqlimi va aloqa xatti-harakatlari."[35] Ular o'quvchilarning sinfga bo'lgan nuqtai nazari o'zgaradimi yoki yo'qmi, ular o'qituvchini va boshqa siyosiy yo'nalishdagi boshqa sinfdoshlarni idrok etadimi yoki yo'qmi, o'qituvchi va boshqa sinfdoshlar jim yurish-turish xatti-harakatlaridan foydalangan holda muloqot qildilar. Maqolada o'quvchilar va o'qituvchilarning sinfdagi o'zaro munosabatlari va o'quvchilarga qanday ta'sir ko'rsatishi haqida juda oz narsa o'rganilmaganligi aytilgan.[35] Maqolaning maqsadi "universitet sinflarida siyosiy g'oyalar qanday ifodalanganligini aniqlash va shu bilan sinf bag'rikengligining siyosiy bag'rikenglik in'ikosiga ta'sirini baholash" edi.[35]

Maqolada ta'kidlanishicha, universitet sinflari sukunat nazariyasini spiralini sinab ko'rish uchun etarli joy, chunki u bu joy shaxslararo, madaniy, ommaviy axborot vositalari va siyosiy aloqa. Xenson va Denker shunday deganlar: "Sinfdagi o'zaro munosabatlar va ijtimoiy nutq o'zaro ta'sirga ega bo'lganligi sababli, o'qituvchilar va talabalar sinfga o'zlarining noaniqliklari va madaniy qarashlarini olib kelishadi".[35]

Tadqiqotda talabalarning siyosiy jim turishi haqidagi tushunchasi va talaba-o'qituvchi siyosiy aloqalaridagi farqlari o'rtasidagi o'zaro bog'liqlik bor-yo'qligi o'rganildi. Tadqiqot, shuningdek, qabul qilingan iqlim bilan talaba va o'qituvchining siyosiy aloqalariga o'xshashligi o'rtasida bog'liqlik bor-yo'qligini shubha ostiga qo'ydi.[35] Tadqiqotchilar O'rta G'arbiy universitetning aloqa kurslari ishtirokchilaridan foydalanishdi. Talabalar o'qituvchi tomonidan yaratilgan siyosiy sukunat, sinfdagi iqlim va iqlim haqidagi tushunchalari bo'yicha so'rovga javob berishdi. Ushbu tadqiqot natijalari shuni ko'rsatdiki, siyosiy partiyada sezilayotgan o'xshashliklarning ijobiy aloqasi mavjud va mafkuraviy talaba va o'qituvchining ko'proq siyosiy sukunatni anglashdagi farqlari.[35]

Kompyuter vositasida aloqada

Sukunat nazariyasining spirali bilan bog'liq tadqiqotlar diqqat markazida yuzma-yuz ta'sir o'tkazish 2000 yilgacha nazariya keyinchalik a kompyuter vositasida aloqa atrof-muhit. Ushbu kontekstdagi birinchi tadqiqot abort qilish masalasi bo'yicha onlayn suhbat xonalaridagi aloqa xatti-harakatlarini tahlil qildi va ozchilik fikr egalari ko'proq gapirishga imkon berishini aniqladilar, ammo ularning sharhlari betaraf qoldi.[36] Boshqa bir tadqiqotda milliy saylovga oid Koreyaning e'lonlar taxtasi postlariga e'tibor qaratildi va onlayn nashrlar va asosiy ommaviy axborot vositalarida nomzodlarning taqdimoti o'rtasidagi bog'liqlik aniqlandi.[37] Uchinchi tadqiqot onlayn tekshiruv tizimiga qaratilgan bo'lib, izolyatsiya qo'rquvi a'zolarning neytral va salbiy sharhlarni berishga tayyorligini kamaytiradi.[38] "Spiral Silence" nazariyasi "noma'lum ko'p kanalli aloqa platformalari kontekstida" kengaytirilgan va "onlayn fikr bildirishda kommunikativ affordanlarning rolini hisobga olish zarurati" ham hal qilingan.[38]

Ijtimoiy tarmoqlarda

Hozirgi adabiyot spiral modelni ijtimoiy tarmoqlar kontekst. Gearxart va Jang ijtimoiy tarmoqlardan foydalanish odamlarning siyosiy mavzular bo'yicha o'z fikrlarini bildirish motivatsiyasini oshiradimi yoki yo'qligini tekshirish uchun tadqiqot o'tkazmoqdalar. Natijalar shuni ko'rsatadiki, ijtimoiy tarmoq foydalanuvchilari "o'zlarining siyosiy aloqador postlariga qattiq salbiy munosabat bildirganlar, o'zlarini tsenzura qilishlari mumkin.[39] Boshqa bir tadqiqot, ijtimoiy media kontekstida gapirish va muammoning ahamiyati o'rtasidagi ijobiy munosabatni tasdiqlaydi: fikrlaydigan shaxslar gey bezorilik muhim ijtimoiy masala sifatida Facebookda fikr bildirish ehtimoli ko'proq.[40] Ijtimoiy tarmoqlar kundalik hayotimizda tobora muhim ahamiyat kasb etar ekan, aldamchi ijtimoiy botlar onlayn suhbatlar va fikrlarni boshqarish uchun muvaffaqiyatli qo'llanildi.[41] Amaldagi tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, "ijtimoiy botlar" ijtimoiy tarmoqlarda jamoatchilik fikriga ta'sir o'tkazish uchun fikr muhitini boshqarish uchun keng miqyosda qo'llanilmoqda.[42] Ijtimoiy botlar - bu kompyuter algoritmlari tomonidan boshqariladigan ijtimoiy tarmoqdagi akkauntlar. Ular avtomatik ravishda tarkib yaratishi va odamlar foydalanuvchisi bilan o'zaro aloqada bo'lishi mumkin, ko'pincha odamlarga taqlid qilishi yoki taqlid qilishi mumkin.[43] Tadqiqotlar shuni ko'rsatadiki, oz sonli ijtimoiy botlar ijtimoiy fikrlarni jamoatchilik fikrini osongina yo'naltirishi va sukunat modelining spiralini qo'zg'atishi mumkin.[44] Masalan, olimlar ijtimoiy botlar 2016 yilgi AQSh Prezidenti saylovi atrofidagi siyosiy munozaralarga ta'sir qilishi mumkinligini aniqladilar[45] va 2017 yilgi Frantsiya prezidentlik saylovlari.[46]

Ijtimoiy kapital

Sukunat nazariyasining spirali ham qo'llanilishi mumkin ijtimoiy kapital kontekst. So'nggi tadqiqotlar ijtimoiy kapitalni "fuqarolarga normalarini ishlab chiqishga imkon beradigan o'zgaruvchi sifatida qaraydi ishonch va o'zaro bog'liqlik kollektiv faoliyatida muvaffaqiyatli ishtirok etish uchun zarur bo'lgan ".[47] Bitta tadqiqotda ijtimoiy kapitalning uchta individual ko'rsatkichlari ko'rib chiqiladi -fuqarolik faoliyati, ishonch va qo'shnichilik va ushbu ko'rsatkichlar o'rtasidagi munosabatlar va odamlarning o'z fikrlarini bildirishga tayyorligi va o'z fikrlarini qo'llab-quvvatlashni anglashlari. Natijalar shuni ko'rsatadiki, fuqarolik faoliyati odamlarning o'z fikrlarini bildirish istagi va qo'shnichilik va ishonchga bevosita ta'sir qiladi, odamlarning o'z fikrlarini qo'llab-quvvatlashini anglashiga bevosita ijobiy ta'sir ko'rsatdi.[47] Shuningdek, tadqiqot shuni ko'rsatadiki, "fuqarolik ishtirokining fikrni ifoda etishga bevosita (lekin bilvosita emas) ta'siri faqatgina potentsial farqni yanada kuchaytiradi. bog'lash va ko'prik ijtimoiy kapital "deb nomlangan.[47]

Internet

Izolyatsiyani olib tashlaydigan omillarni ajratish

Izolyatsiya tushunchasi turli xil ta'riflarga ega, ular o'rganilayotgan sharoitlarga bog'liq. Bir misolda izolyatsiya muammosi quyidagicha aniqlangan ijtimoiy chekinish, tengdoshlarning o'zaro ta'sirining past nisbiy chastotalari sifatida aniqlanadi.[48][49] Boshqa tadqiqotchilar izolyatsiyani tengdoshlarni qabul qilishning past darajasi yoki yuqori darajalari deb aniqladilar tengdoshlarni rad etish.[50] Internetga nisbatan izolyatsiyani ko'rib chiqadigan tadqiqotlar, shuningdek, Internet qanday qilib odamlarni tirik odamlardan aloqasini uzib, ularni jamiyatdan ajratib qo'yishiga qaratadi.[51][52][53] yoki Internet qanday kamayadi ijtimoiy izolyatsiya ularning kengayishiga imkon berish orqali odamlarning ijtimoiy tarmoqlar va ularga do'stlaringiz va oilangiz bilan aloqada bo'lish uchun ko'proq vositalar berish.[54][55] Internet rivojlanganidan beri, xususan Butunjahon tarmog'i, veb-va shu jumladan turli xil guruhlar vujudga keldi Internet-estafeta suhbati (IRC), yangiliklar guruhlari, ko'p foydalanuvchi o'lchamlari (MUD) va yaqinda tijorat virtual jamoalar.[56] Qanday qilib nazariyalar va gipotezalar Internet - guruhlarga ta'sir qiluvchi shaxslar juda ko'p va keng ko'lamli. Ba'zi tadqiqotchilar ushbu tez o'sib borayotgan virtual chat kliklarini ko'rishadi, onlayn o'yinlar yoki kompyuter bozorlari, ayniqsa, haqoratlangan odamlar uchun ijtimoiy hayotda faolroq ishtirok etish uchun yangi imkoniyat.[57][58][59]

An'anaga ko'ra, ijtimoiy izolyatsiya odamning tashqi pozitsiyasi tushunchasi atrofida uyushtirilgan bir o'lchovli konstruktsiya sifatida ifodalanadi. tengdoshlar guruhi va tengdoshlari tomonidan guruhdan chiqarilishi natijasida guruhdan ajralib turishni anglatadi.[60] Bolalardan kattalarga qadar adabiyot shuni ko'rsatadiki, odamlar izolyatsiya tushunchasini tushunadilar va ular o'zlari a'zo bo'lgan guruhlardan ajralib qolish oqibatlaridan qo'rqishadi. Izolyatsiyadan qo'rqib, odamlar o'zlarini turli xil qarashlarga ega deb hisoblasalar, ochiq gapirishga jur'at eta olmadilar, bu odamlar o'zlarini faqat bir fikrlovchi shaxslar bilan suhbatlashish bilan cheklashlarini yoki hech qanday suhbatlashmasliklarini anglatadi.[61] Witschge yana tushuntirdi: "Boshqalarga zarar etkazishdan qo'rqish yoki o'zlariga zarar etkazishdan qo'rqish bo'ladimi, odamlarning erkin so'zlashiga xalaqit beradigan omillar mavjud va shu bilan ular ideal bo'lmagan munozaralar turiga olib keladi, chunki bu xilma-xillik va tenglikka to'sqinlik qiladi ishtirokchilar va qarashlar to'liq paydo bo'lishi kerak. "[62]

Internet vositasi odamlarni ijtimoiy yakkalanish qo'rquvidan xalos etishga qodir va shu bilan sukunat spiralini o'chiradi. Bitta maqola ijtimoiy tarmoqlar izolyatsiya qo'rquvini susaytirishi mumkinligini isbotlaydi. Tadqiqot shuni ko'rsatadiki, irqchilik nuqtai nazariga ega bo'lgan ovozli ozchilik Facebook-da yoqimsiz fikrlarni bildirishga tayyor.[63] Internet odamlarga fikrlari o'xshash va o'xshash qarashlarga ega odamlar guruhini topadigan joyni topishga imkon beradi. Van Alstyne va Brynjolfsson "Internet foydalanuvchilari o'xshash qadriyatlarga ega bo'lgan fikrlovchi shaxslar bilan o'zaro munosabatlarni izlashlari va shu bilan qadriyatlari o'zlaridan farq qiladigan odamlarga muhim qarorlarga ishonish ehtimoli kamayishi mumkin" deb ta'kidladilar.[64] Internetning xususiyatlari nafaqat odamlarni psixologik to'siqlardan xalos qilish orqali qasddan o'ylashga olib kelishi, balki yangi imkoniyatlarni ham keltirib chiqarishi mumkin, chunki u "boshqariladigan keng ko'lamda, ko'p-ko'p muhokama qilish va muhokama qilish. "[65] Aksincha an'anaviy ommaviy axborot vositalari Ishtirok etishni cheklaydigan Internet imkoniyatlarni kengaytirish xususiyatlarini, mavjud bo'lgan ma'lumotlarning ulkan hajmini keltirib chiqaradi, aniq auditoriyani maqsadli yo'naltirish va odamlarni vositalar yordamida birlashtirish mumkin.[66]

Onlayn va oflayn rejimda

Internet - bu ko'pchilik yashaydigan joy ma'lumotnoma va ijtimoiy guruhlar o'xshash qarashlar bilan mavjud. Bu odamlarda izolyatsiya qo'rquvi kamroq ko'rinadigan joyga aylandi. Bitta tadqiqot maqolasida shaxslarning o'z fikrlarini onlayn va oflayn rejimda gapirish istagi tekshirildi. 305 ishtirokchining so'rov natijalari bo'yicha sukunat xatti-harakatlarining onlayn va oflayn spiralini taqqoslash va qarama-qarshilik aniqlandi.[67] Lyu va Faxmi "ko'pchilik guruhiga rioya qilmasdan, onlayn muhokamadan chiqish oson" deb ta'kidladilar.[68] Bu sukunat spirali onlayn muhitda yuzaga kelmaydi degani emas. Odamlar o'zlarining fikrlaridan farq qiladigan hukmron fikr mavjud bo'lganda ham, hatto onlayn rejimda ham gapirish ehtimoli kamroq.[68] Ammo kimdir ular uchun gapiradigan ma'lumot guruhiga ega bo'lsa, onlayn muhitdagi odamlar gapirishadi.[68]

Onlaynda ozchiliklar nuqtai nazarini rag'batlantiradigan bir kishining borligi sukunat spiraliga chek qo'yishi mumkin. Studies of the spiral of silence in online behavior have not acknowledged that a person may be more likely to speak out against dominant views offline as well.[68] The person might have characteristics that make them comfortable speaking out against dominant views offline, which make them just as comfortable speaking out in an online setting.

Although research suggests that people will disclose their opinions more often in an online setting, silencing of views can still occur. One study indicates that people on Facebook are less willing to discuss the Snowden and NSA stories than an offline situation such as a family dinner or public meeting.[69] Another research article examined the influence of different opinion climates in onlayn forumlar (opinion congruence with the majority of forum participants vs. website source) and found personal opinion congruence was more influential than the online site in which the forum is situated in.[70] Gonzenbach and Nekmat said it might be worth researching whether the factors in these studies or other factors cause people to be more comfortable when it comes to speaking their mind while online.[70]

Heterogeneity and anonymity

The nature of the Internet facilitates not only the participation of more people, but also a more heterogeneous group of people. Page stated, "The onward rush of electronic communications technology will presumably increase the diversity of available ideas and the speed and ease with which they fly about and compete with each other."[71] The reason people engage in deliberations is because of their differences, and the Internet allows differences to be easily found. The Internet seems the perfect place to find different views of a very diverse group of people who are at the same time open to such difference and disagreement needed for deliberation. Noelle-Neumann's initial idea of cowering and muted citizens is difficult to reconcile with empirical studies documenting uninhibited discussion in computer-mediated contexts such as suhbat xonalari and newsgroups.[72][73][74][75]

The Internet provides an anonymous setting, and it can be argued that in an anonymous setting, fears of isolation and humiliation would be reduced. Wallace recognized that when people believe their actions cannot be attributed to them personally, they tend to become less inhibited by ijtimoiy konvensiyalar and restraints. This can be very positive, particularly when people are offered the opportunity to discuss difficult personal issues under conditions in which they feel safer.[76]

The groups' ability to taunt an individual is lessened on the Internet,[iqtibos kerak ] thus reducing the tendency to conform. Wallace goes on to summarize a number of empirical studies that do find that dissenters feel more liberated to express their views online than offline, which might result from the fact that the person in the minority would not have to endure taunts or ridicule from people that are making up the majority, or be made to feel uncomfortable for having a different opinion.[77] Stromer-Galley considered that "an absence of og'zaki bo'lmagan cues, which leads to a lowered sense of social presence, and a heightened sense of anonymity" frees people from the psychological barriers that keep them from engaging in a face-to-face deliberation.[78]

The crux of the spiral of silence is that people believe consciously or subconsciously that the expression of unpopular opinions will lead to negative repercussions. These beliefs may not exist on the Internet for several reasons. First, embarrassment and humiliation depends on the physical presence of others.[iqtibos kerak ] Yilda kompyuter vositasida aloqa, physical isolation often already exists and poses no further threat.[79] Second, a great deal of normativ ta'sir is communicated through nonverbal cues, such as ko'z bilan aloqa qilish va imo-ishoralar,[80] but computer-mediated communication typically precludes many of these cues. Third, Keisler, Siegel, and McQuire observe that nonverbal ijtimoiy kontekst cues convey formality and status inequality in yuzma-yuz muloqot.[81] When these cues are removed, the importance of ijtimoiy holat as a source of influence recedes. Group hierarchies that develop in face-to-face interaction emerge less clearly in a mediated environment.[82] The form and consequences of muvofiqlik influence should undergo significant changes given the interposition of a medium that reduces the ijtimoiy mavjudlik ishtirokchilar.[79] Social presence is defined as the degree of keskinlik of the other person in the interaction[83] or the degree to which the medium conveys some of the person's presence.[84]

Tenglik

An important issue in obtaining heterogeneity in conversation is equal access for all the participants and teng imkoniyatlar to influence in the discussion. When people believe they are ignorant about a topic, incapable to participate in a discussion or not equal to their peers, they tend to not even become involved in a muhokama qilish. When people do decide to participate, their participation might be overruled by dominant others, or their contribution might be valued less or more, depending on their status.[79] Dahlberg praises the Internet for its possibility to liberate people from the ijtimoiy ierarxiyalar and power relations that exist offline: "The 'blindness' of kiber-makon to bodily identity... [is supposed to allow] people to interact as if they were equals. Arguments are said to be assessed by the value of the claims themselves and not the ijtimoiy mavqei of the poster".[85]

Gastil sees this feature as one of the strongest points of the Internet: "if computer-mediated interaction can consistently reduce the independent influence of status, it will have a powerful advantage over face-to-face deliberation".[86] While status cues are difficult to detect, perceptions about the status converge, and this lessens qolipga solish va xurofot.[77]

It may be that people do feel more equal in online forums than they feel offline. Irqchilik, yoshlilik va boshqa turlari kamsitish against out groups "seems to be diminishing because the cues to guruhdan tashqari status are not as obvious".[87] Next to this, the Internet has rapidly and dramatically increased the capacities to develop, ulush va tashkil qilish ma `lumot,[88] realizing more equality of ma'lumotlarga kirish.[89]

Methodological research approaches

The relationship between the perception of public opinion and willingness to speak-up is mainly measured through so'rovnomalar[90] In surveys, respondents are often asked whether they would reveal their opinions given a hypothetical situation, right after their opinions about the public opinion and their opinion is received. Whether asking hypothetical questions can reflect real life cases was questioned by some communication scholars, leading to a criticism of this metodologiya as not being able to capture what the respondent would do in a real-life situation.[91] A research study addressed this criticism by comparatively testing a spiral model both in a hypothetical survey and in a fokus-guruh.[91] The findings are in line with the critic of hypothetical survey questions, demonstrating a significant increase in the spiral of silence in focus groups.[91]

Among different approaches to survey methodology, tasavvurlarni o'rganish design is the leading method employed to analyze and test the theory.[90] Cross-sectional design involves the analysis of the relationship between public opinion and willingness to speak at one point in time.[90]

While many of the researchers employ cross-sectional design, some scholars employed panel ma'lumotlari.[92] Under this methodology, three specific approaches have been used. Noelle-Neumann herself tested the theory from the aggregate level. Using this approach, the change process is "observed by comparing the absolute share of people perceiving a majority climate with people willing to express their views over time."[93] The second approach that has been used in Spiral of Silence research is conducting separate regressions for each panel survey wave. The drawback for this approach is that the individual change of climate and opinions perception is ignored.[93] The last approach a few scholars used in conducting Spiral of Silence researches is to use changed scores as dependent variables. However, as intuitive as this approach may be, it "leads to well-documented difficulties with respect to statistical properties, such as regression to the mean or the negative correlation of the change score with the time one state".[93]

Tanqidlar

The critics of this theory most often claim that individuals have different influences that affect whether they speak out or not.

Research indicates that people fear isolation in their small social circles more than they do in the population at large. Within a large nation, one can always find a group of people who share one's opinions, however people fear isolation from their close family and friends more in theory. Research has demonstrated that this fear of isolation is stronger than the fear of being isolated from the entire public, as it is typically measured.[94]

Scholars have also argued that both personal characteristics and various culture among different groups will have influences on whether a person will willingly speak out. If one person "has a positive self-concept and lacks a sense of shame, that person will speak out regardless of how she or he perceives the climate of public opinion."[95] Another influence critics give for people choosing not to speak out against public opinion is culture. Open expression of ideas is forbidden in some of the cultures.[95] Some cultures are more individualistic, which would support more of an individual's own opinion, while collectivist cultures support the overall group's opinion and needs. Gender can be also considered as a cultural factor. In some cultures, women's "perception of language, not public opinion, forces them to remain quiet."[95] Scheufele & Moy, further assert that certain conflict styles and cultural indicators should be used to understand these differences.[23]

The nature of issues will influence the dynamic processes of the spiral of silence.[96] Yeric and Todd present three issues type, including enduring issues that will be discussed by the public for a long time; emerging issues that are new to the public but have the potential to become enduring issues; and the transitory issues, which don't stay in the public consciousness for very long but come up from time to time.[97] The research suggests that issues difference affects people's willingness to express. Facebook users are more likely to post their real thoughts on emerging issues such as gay marriage in an incongruent opinion climate.[96]

Another criticism of the spiral of silence research is that the research designs do not observe the movement in the spiral over time. Critics propose that Noelle-Neumann's emphasis on time[9] in the formation of the spiral should reflect on the methodology as well, and the dynamic nature of the spiral model should be acknowledged. They argue that the spiral of silence theory involves a "time factor", considering that the changes in public opinion eventually lead to change in people's assessments of the public opinion.[93] Also, according to Spilchal, the spiral of silence theory "ignores the evidence of the historical development of public opinion, both in theory and practice, through the extension of suffrage, organisation of political propaganda groups, the establishment of pressure groups and political parties, the eligibility of ever wider circles of public officials and, eventually, the installation of several forms of direct democracy."[98]

Some scholars also provide understandings of the theory in the contemporary society by pointing out that "it is not so much the actual statistical majority that generates pressure for conformity as it is the climate of opinion conveyed in large measure by the media."[10] Under the great influence by the media coverage, the climate of opinion "is not invariably an accurate reflection of the distribution of opinions within the polity."[10]

Further, Scheufele & Moy[23] find problems in the operationalization of key terms, including willingness to speak out. This construct should be measured in terms of actually speaking out, not voting or other conceptually similar constructs. Conformity experiments have no moral component, yet morality is a key construct in the model. These conformity experiments, particularly those by Asch, form part of the base of the theory. Scholars question whether these conformity experiments are relevant to the development of the Spiral of Silence.[23]

False dilemmas and silence of consistency

Research indicates that while the existence of groups with other opinions than those that are supposed to be dominant in a society opens a possibility for some people to express some different opinions, fallacy assumptions in such groups that criticism of particular aspects of that group's program is support for society's mainstream views is a source of false dilemmas. This research indicates that such false dilemmas, especially when there are inconsistencies both in mainstream views and in organized opposition views, causes a spiral of silence that specifically silences logically consistent third, fourth or higher number viewpoint criticism. The research in question does not find a solution in many approaches of "recognizing cognitive bias" but instead indicate that such assumptions are part of the problem by promoting the myth of one's own group having overcome its bias by institutional means and allegations of rational critical arguments being due to bias in the minds of critics, citing evolutionary research that shows that not only would any predisposition for justification of views be selected against due to costing nutrients without improving adaptivity of behavior, but that the claim that most adult humans are irrational due to missing stimulation of rationality in early childhood is also evolutionarily indefensible as genes for potential rationality would have been totally eliminated by selection before reaching significant population fraction if they needed a society already promoting rationality to manifest themselves adaptively. The research indicates that humans are not inherently irrational but are forced to pretend irrationality by false dilemmas that claim rational criticism to be justifications for irrational resentment, and suggest that openly expressed rationality can be promoted by discussions in which no exclusion based on traditional political scales or beneficiary classifications exist but all allegations of irrational motives as well as assumptions that some opinions are linked or that criticism of one view is defence of another specific view are excluded.[99][sahifa kerak ][100][sahifa kerak ]

Shuningdek qarang

Izohlar

Adabiyotlar

  1. ^ a b v d e f g Scheufele 2007.
  2. ^ a b Scheufle, Dietram A.; Moy, Patricia (2000-03-01). "TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE: A CONCEPTUAL REVIEW AND EMPIRICAL OUTLOOK". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 12 (1): 3–28. doi:10.1093/ijpor/12.1.3. ISSN  1471-6909.
  3. ^ Neill 2009, p. 42.
  4. ^ G'arb, Richard; Turner, Lynn H. (2010). Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Applicatinon. Nyu-York: McGraw Hill. p. 411. ISBN  978-0-07-338507-5.
  5. ^ a b v d e f g h men j Noelle-Neumann 1984.
  6. ^ a b Noelle-Neumann 1977.
  7. ^ Miller 2005 yil, p. 278.
  8. ^ Kant 1781, p. 498.
  9. ^ a b v d e f g h Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth (1993). The spiral of silence: Public opinion, our social skin. Chikago: Chikago universiteti matbuoti.
  10. ^ a b v Lang, Kurt; Lang, Gladys Engel (1 September 2012). "What is this Thing we Call Public Opinion? Reflections on the Spiral of Silence". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 24 (3): 368–386. doi:10.1093/ijpor/eds014. ISSN  0954-2892.
  11. ^ Lippmann, W (1946). Jamoatchilik fikri. Tranzaksiya noshirlari.
  12. ^ McCombs, M. E; Shaw, D. L (1972). "The agenda-setting function of mass media". Har chorakda jamoatchilik fikri. 36 (2): 176–187. doi:10.1086/267990.
  13. ^ a b Ball-Rokeach, S; Cantor, M. G (1986). Media, audience, and social structure. Sage nashrlari, Inc.
  14. ^ a b Ho, Shirley S.; Chen, Vivian Hsueh-Hua; Sim, Clarice C. (2013-04-01). "The spiral of silence: examining how cultural predispositions, news attention, and opinion congruency relate to opinion expression". Osiyo aloqa jurnali. 23 (2): 113–134. doi:10.1080/01292986.2012.725178. ISSN  0129-2986.
  15. ^ Glynn, C. J; McLeod, J.M (1984). "Implications of the spiral of silence theory for communication and public opinion research". Political Communication Yearbook: 43–65.
  16. ^ a b Kennamer, J.D (1990). "Self-serving biases in perceiving the opinions of others: Implications for the spiral of silence". Aloqa bo'yicha tadqiqotlar. 17 (3): 393–404. doi:10.1177/009365090017003006.
  17. ^ Tichenor, P. J; Wackman, D. B (1973). "Mass media and community public opinion". Amerikalik xulq-atvor bo'yicha olim. 16 (4): 593–606. doi:10.1177/000276427301600408.
  18. ^ Chaudhry, Irfan; Gruzd, Anatoliy (2020). "Expressing and Challenging Racist Discourse on Facebook: How Social Media Weaken the "Spiral of Silence" Theory". Siyosat va Internet. 12 (1): 88–108. doi:10.1002/poi3.197. ISSN  1944-2866.
  19. ^ a b v Griffen 2009.
  20. ^ Cherry 2012.
  21. ^ Weiman, Gabriel (2000). Communicating Unreality (1-nashr). United States of America: Sage Publications, Inc.
  22. ^ Miller 2005 yil, p. 278.
  23. ^ a b v d Scheufele & Moy 2000.
  24. ^ Shelton, J. Nicole (2005). "Intergroup Contact and Pluralistic Ignorance". Shaxsiyat va ijtimoiy psixologiya jurnali. 88 (1): 91–107. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.1.91. PMID  15631577.
  25. ^ Miller 2005 yil, p. 279.
  26. ^ Wedel, T (1994). "The spiral of silence in popular culture: applying a public opinion theory to radio station popularity". Kaliforniya shtati universiteti.
  27. ^ Shanahan et al. 2004 yil.
  28. ^ Salmon, C.T; Neuwirth, k (1990). "Perceptions of opinion "climates" and willingness to discuss the issue of abortion". Jurnalistika va har chorakda ommaviy kommunikatsiyalar. 67 (3): 567–577. doi:10.1177/107769909006700312.
  29. ^ Moy, P; Domke, D; Stamm, K (2001). "The spiral of silence and public opinion on affirmative action". Jurnalistika va har chorakda ommaviy kommunikatsiyalar. 78 (1): 7–25. doi:10.1177/107769900107800102.
  30. ^ Hayes, A.F (2007). "Exploring the Forms of Self-Censorship: On the Spiral of Silence and the Use of Opinion Expression Avoidance Strategies". Aloqa jurnali. 57 (4): 785–802. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00368.x.
  31. ^ Milgram, S (1961). "Nationality and conformity". Ilmiy Amerika. 205 (6): 45–51. Bibcode:1961 yil ScciAm.205f..45M. doi:10.1038 / Scientificamerican1261-45.
  32. ^ Bond, Rod; Smith, Peter B. (1996). "Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch's (1952b, 1956) line judgment task". Psixologik byulleten. 119 (1): 111–137. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.119.1.111.
  33. ^ Huang 2005.
  34. ^ Spencer & Stephen 2008.
  35. ^ a b v d e f Henson & Denker 2007.
  36. ^ McDevitt, M. (1 December 2003). "Spiral of Moderation: Opinion Expression in Computer-Mediated Discussion". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 15 (4): 454–470. doi:10.1093/ijpor/15.4.454.
  37. ^ Jung Choi, Yun; Lee, Cheolhan; Hyuk Lee, Jong (March 2004). "Influence of poll results on the advocates' political discourse: An application of functional analysis debates to online messages in the 2002 Korean presidential election". Osiyo aloqa jurnali. 14 (1): 95–110. doi:10.1080/0129298042000195189.
  38. ^ a b Askay, David A. (1 December 2015). "Silence in the crowd: The spiral of silence contributing to the positive bias of opinions in an online review system". Yangi media va jamiyat. 17 (11): 1811–1829. doi:10.1177/1461444814535190. ISSN  1461-4448.
  39. ^ Gearhart, Sherice; Zhang, Weiwu (2015-04-16). ""Was It Something I Said?" "No, It Was Something You Posted!" A Study of the Spiral of Silence Theory in Social Media Contexts". Kiberpsixologiya, o'zini tutish va ijtimoiy tarmoq. 18 (4): 208–213. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0443. PMID  25879378.
  40. ^ Gearhart, S.; Zhang, W. (23 September 2013). "Gay Bullying and Online Opinion Expression: Testing Spiral of Silence in the Social Media Environment". Ijtimoiy fanlarni kompyuter sharhi. 32 (1): 18–36. doi:10.1177/0894439313504261.
  41. ^ Yang, Kai‐Cheng; Varol, Onur; Devis, Kleyton A.; Ferrara, Emilio; Flammini, Alessandro; Menczer, Filippo (January 2019). "Arming the public with artificial intelligence to counter social bots". Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 1 (1): 48–61. doi:10.1002/hbe2.115. ISSN  2578-1863.
  42. ^ Ferrara, Emilio; Varol, Onur; Devis, Kleyton; Menzer, Filippo; Flammini, Alessandro (2016-06-24). "The rise of social bots". ACM aloqalari. 59 (7): 96–104. doi:10.1145/2818717. ISSN  0001-0782.
  43. ^ Davis, Clayton Allen; Varol, Onur; Ferrara, Emilio; Flammini, Alessandro; Menczer, Filippo (2016). "BotOrNot". Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web - WWW '16 Companion. Nyu-York, Nyu-York, AQSh: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/2872518.2889302. ISBN  978-1-4503-4144-8.
  44. ^ Ross, Björn; Pilz, Laura; Cabrera, Benjamin; Brachten, Florian; Neubaum, German; Stieglitz, Stefan (2019-01-14). "Are social bots a real threat? An agent-based model of the spiral of silence to analyse the impact of manipulative actors in social networks". Evropa axborot tizimlari jurnali. 28 (4): 394–412. doi:10.1080/0960085x.2018.1560920. ISSN  0960-085X.
  45. ^ Bessi, Alessandro; Ferrara, Emilio (2016-11-03). "Ijtimoiy botlar 2016 yilgi AQSh prezidentlik saylovlarini onlayn tarzda muhokama qilishni buzmoqda". Birinchi dushanba. doi:10.5210 / fm.v21i11.7090. ISSN  1396-0466.
  46. ^ Ferrara, Emilio (2017-07-31). "Disinformation and social bot operations in the run up to the 2017 French presidential election". Birinchi dushanba. doi:10.5210/fm.v22i8.8005. ISSN  1396-0466.
  47. ^ a b v Dalisay, Francis; Hmielowski, Jay D.; Kushin, Matthew James; Yamamoto, Masahiro (2012). "Social Capital and the Spiral of Silence". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 24 (3): 325–345. doi:10.1093/ijpor/eds023.
  48. ^ O'Connor 1969.
  49. ^ O'Connor 1972.
  50. ^ Gottman, Gonso & Rasmussen 1975.
  51. ^ Kraut et al. 1998 yil.
  52. ^ Moody 2001.
  53. ^ Sleek 1998.
  54. ^ Morris & Ogan 2002.
  55. ^ Bradley & Poppen 2003.
  56. ^ Sassenberg 2002.
  57. ^ Rheingold 1993.
  58. ^ Cummings, Sproull & Kiesler 2002.
  59. ^ McKenna & Bargh 1998.
  60. ^ Bowker et al. 1998 yil.
  61. ^ Witschge 2002.
  62. ^ Witschge 2002, p. 8.
  63. ^ Chaudhry, Irfan; Gruzd, Anatoliy (2019-01-07). "Expressing and Challenging Racist Discourse on Facebook: How Social Media Weaken the "Spiral of Silence" Theory". Siyosat va Internet. 12 (1): 88–108. doi:10.1002/poi3.197. ISSN  1944-2866.
  64. ^ van Alstyne & Brynjolfsson 1996, p. 24.
  65. ^ Coleman & Gøtze 2001, p. 17.
  66. ^ O'Hara 2002.
  67. ^ Liu & Fahmy 2009, p. 36.
  68. ^ a b v d Liu & Fahmy 2009.
  69. ^ "Spiral of Silence", Ijtimoiy media va siyosat ensiklopediyasi, SAGE Publications, Inc., 2014, doi:10.4135/9781452244723.n504, ISBN  978-1-4522-4471-6, olingan 2020-11-13
  70. ^ a b Nekmat, Elmie; Gonzenbach, William J. (2013). "Multiple Opinion Climates in Online Forums: Role of Website Source Reference and Within-Forum Opinion Congruency". Jurnalistika va har chorakda ommaviy kommunikatsiyalar. 90 (4): 736–756. doi:10.1177/1077699013503162. ISSN  1077-6990.
  71. ^ Page 1996, p. 124.
  72. ^ Wanta & Dimitrova 2000.
  73. ^ O'Sullivan 1995.
  74. ^ Sproull & Kiesler 1992.
  75. ^ Hiltz, Johnson & Turoff 1986.
  76. ^ Wallace 1999 yil, 124-25 betlar.
  77. ^ a b Wallace 1999 yil.
  78. ^ Stromer-Galley 2002, p. 35.
  79. ^ a b v McDevitt, Kiousis & Wahl-Jorgensen 2003.
  80. ^ Burgoon, Buller & Woodall 1989.
  81. ^ Keisler, Siegel & McQuire 1984.
  82. ^ Uilyams 1977 yil.
  83. ^ Short, Williams & Christie 1976.
  84. ^ Rice & Williams 1984.
  85. ^ Dahlberg 2001, p. 14.
  86. ^ Gastil 2000, p. 359.
  87. ^ Wallace 1999 yil, p. 99.
  88. ^ Warren 2001.
  89. ^ Gimmler 2001.
  90. ^ a b v Neuwirth, K (2007). "The Spiral of Silence and Fear of Isolation". Aloqa jurnali. 57 (3): 450–468. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00352.x.
  91. ^ a b v Scheufele, D. A.; Shanahan, J.; Lee, E. (1 June 2001). "Real Talk: Manipulating the Dependent Variable in Spiral of Silence Research". Aloqa bo'yicha tadqiqotlar. 28 (3): 304–324. doi:10.1177/009365001028003003.
  92. ^ Katz, Cheryl; Baldassare, Mark (1994). "Popularity in a Freefall: Measuring a Spiral of Silence at the End of the Bush Presidency". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 6 (1): 1–12. doi:10.1093/ijpor/6.1.1.
  93. ^ a b v d Matthes, J. (2014). "Observing the "Spiral" in the Spiral of Silence". Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali. 27 (2): 155–176. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edu032.
  94. ^ Moy, Domke & Stamm 2001.
  95. ^ a b v Ross 2007 yil.
  96. ^ a b Gearhart, Sherice; Zhang, Weiwu (2015-12-03). "Same Spiral, Different Day? Testing the Spiral of Silence Across Issue Types". Aloqa bo'yicha tadqiqotlar. 45 (1): 34–54. doi:10.1177/0093650215616456. ISSN  0093-6502.
  97. ^ Brouard, Sylvain; Guinaudeau, Isabelle (2014-08-28). "Policy beyond politics? Public opinion, party politics and the French pro-nuclear energy policy". Davlat siyosati jurnali. 35 (1): 137–170. doi:10.1017/s0143814x14000221. ISSN  0143-814X.
  98. ^ Splichal, Slavko (2015). "Legacy of Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann: The Spiral of Silence and Other Controversies". Evropa aloqa jurnali. 30 (3): 353–363. doi:10.1177/0267323115589265. (Orqaga tortildi, qarang doi:10.1177/0267323116650776. Agar bu tortib olingan qog'ozga qasddan keltirilgan bo'lsa, uni o'zgartiring {{Orqaga olindi}} bilan {{Orqaga olindi| qasddan = ha}}.)
  99. ^ Percival, Ray Scott (2012). The Myth of the Closed Mind: Explaining why and how People are Rational. ISBN  9780812696851.
  100. ^ Fusari, Angelo (2014). Methodological Misconceptions in the Social Sciences. doi:10.1007/978-94-017-8675-1. ISBN  978-94-017-8674-4.

Bibliografiya

  • van Alstyne, M; Brynjolfsson, E (1996), Electronic communities: Global village or cyberbalkans? (paper), Cleveland, OH: The Axborot tizimlari bo'yicha xalqaro konferentsiya.
  • Anderson, JA (1996), Communication theory: epistemological foundations, New York, NY: Guilford.
  • Bradley, N; Poppen, W (2003), "Assistive technology, computers and Internet may decrease sense of isolation for homebound elderly and disabled persons", Texnologiya va nogironlik, 15 (1): 19–25, doi:10.3233/TAD-2003-15104.
  • Bowker, Anne; Bukowski, William; Zargarpour, Sepideh; Xoza, Betsi (1998), "A Structural and Functional Analysis of a Two-Dimensional Model of Social Isolation", Merrill-Palmer har chorakda, 44 (4): 447–463, JSTOR  23093748.
  • Burgoon, JK; Buller, DB; Woodall, WG (1989), Nonverbal communication: The unspoken dialogue, Nyu-York: Harper va Row.
  • Cherry, Kendra (2012), "The Asch Conformity Experiments", Psixologiya, Haqida, olingan 8 oktyabr, 2013.
  • Coleman, S; Gøtze, J (2001), Bowling together: Online public engagement in policy deliberation (PDF), archived from the original on 2008-09-16CS1 maint: BOT: original-url holati noma'lum (havola).
  • Kammings, J; Sproull, L; Kiesler, SB (2002), "Beyond hearing: Where real-world and online support meet", Guruhlar dinamikasi: nazariya, tadqiqot va amaliyot, 6 (1): 78–88, doi:10.1037/1089-2699.6.1.78.
  • Dahlberg, L (2001), "The Internet and democratic discourse", Axborot, aloqa va jamiyat, 4 (4): 615–33, doi:10.1080/13691180110097030.
  • Gastil, J (2000), "Is face-to-face citizen deliberation a luxury or a necessity?", Siyosiy aloqa, 14 (4): 357–61, doi:10.1080/10584600050178960.
  • Gimmler, A (2001), "Deliberative democracy, the public sphere and the Internet", Falsafa va ijtimoiy tanqid, 27 (4): 357–61, doi:10.1177/019145370102700402.
  • Gonzenbach, WJ; King, C; Jablonski, P (1999), "Homosexuals and the military: an analysis of the spiral of silence", Howard Journal of Communication, 10 (4): 281–96, doi:10.1080/106461799246762.
  • ———; Stevenson, RL (1994), "Children with AIDS attending public school: an analysis of the spiral of silence", Siyosiy aloqa, 1: 3–18, doi:10.1080/10584609.1994.9963007.
  • Gottman, J; Gonso, J; Rasmussen, B (1975), "Social interaction, social competence, and friendship in children", Bolalarni rivojlantirish, 46 (3): 709–18, doi:10.2307/1128569, JSTOR  1128569.
  • Griffen, EM (2009), Aloqa nazariyasiga birinchi qarash (7th ed.), New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
  • Hayes, AF; Glynn, CJ; Shanahan, J (2005a), "Willingness to self-censor: A construct and measurement tool for public opinion research", Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali, 17 (3): 298–323, doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh073.
  • ———; Glynn, CJ; Shanahan, J (2005b), "Validating the willingness to self-censor scale: Individual differences in the effect of the climate of opinion on opinion expression", Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali, 17 (4): 443–55, doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh072.
  • Henson, J; Denker, K (2007), "I'm a Republican, but please don't tell: an application of spiral of silence theory to perceptions of classroom climate", Konferentsiya ishlari, National Communication Association, 1.
  • Hiltz, SR; Jonson, K; Turoff, M (1986), "Experiments in group decision making: Communication process and outcome in face-to-face versus computerized conferences", Inson bilan aloqa bo'yicha tadqiqotlar, 13 (2): 225–52, doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1986.tb00104.x.
  • Huang, Huiping (2005), "A Cross-Cultural Test of the Spiral of Silence", Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali, 17 (3): 1–25, doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh065.
  • Kant, Immanuil (1781), Sof fikrni tanqid qilish
  • Kiesler, S; Siegel, J; McQuire, TW (1984), "Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication", Amerikalik psixolog, 39 (10): 1123–34, doi:10.1037 / 0003-066x.39.10.1123.
  • Kraut, RE; Patterson, M; Lundmark, V; Kiesler, S; Mukhopadhyay, T; Scherlis, W (1998), "Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?", Amerikalik psixolog, 53 (9): 1017–32, doi:10.1037/0003-066x.53.9.1017, PMID  9841579.
  • Liu, X; Fahmy, S (2009), Testing the spiral of silence in the virtual world: Monitoring opinion-climate online and individuals' willingness to express personal opinions in online versus offline settings (conference paper), 1, International Communication Association, p. 36.
  • McDevitt, M; Kiousis, S; Wahl-Jorgensen, K (2003), "Spiral of moderation: Opinion expression in computer-mediated discussion", Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali, 15 (4): 454–70, doi:10.1093/ijpor/15.4.454.
  • McKenna, KYA; Bargh, JA (1998), "Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity "demarginalization" through virtual group participation", Shaxsiyat va ijtimoiy psixologiya jurnali, 75 (3): 681–94, doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.681.
  • Miller, K (2005), Communication theories: perspectives, processes, and contexts (2nd ed.), New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
  • Moody, EJ (2001), "Internet use and its relationship to loneliness", KiberPsixologiya va o'zini tutish, 4 (3): 393–401, doi:10.1089/109493101300210303, PMID  11710265.
  • Morris, M; Ogan, C (2002), McQauil, D (ed.), "The internet as mass medium", Reader in Mass Communication Theory, London: Sage.
  • Moy, P; Domke, D; Stamm, K (2001), "The spiral of silence and public opinion on affirmative action", Har chorakda jurnalistika va ommaviy kommunikatsiya, 78 (1): 7–25, doi:10.1177/107769900107800102.
  • Neill, Shelly (May 2009), "The Alternate Channel: How Social Media is Challenging the Spiral of Silence Theory in GLBT Communities of Color" (PDF), Amerika universiteti, Washington, DC, archived from asl nusxasi (PDF) 2011-06-29, olingan 2012-04-24
  • Noelle-Neumann, Elisabeth (1974), "The spiral of silence: a theory of public opinion", Aloqa jurnali, 24 (2): 43–51, doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1974.tb00367.x.
  • ——— (1977), "Turbulences in the climate of opinion: Methodological applications of the spiral of silence theory", Har chorakda jamoatchilik fikri, 41 (2): 143–58, doi:10.1086/268371.
  • O'Connor, RD (1969), "Modification of social withdrawal through symbolic modeling", Amaliy xulq-atvorni tahlil qilish jurnali, 2 (1): 15–22, doi:10.1901/jaba.1969.2-15, PMC  1311030, PMID  16795196.
  • ——— (1972), "Relative efficacy of modeling, shaping, and the combined procedures for modification of social withdrawal", Anormal psixologiya jurnali, 79 (3): 327–34, doi:10.1037/h0033226, PMID  5033375.
  • O'Hara, K (2002), "The Internet: A tool for democratic pluralism?", Fan madaniyat sifatida, 11 (2): 287–98, doi:10.1080/09505430220137298.
  • O'Sullivan, PB (1995), "Computer networks and political participation: Santa Monica's teledemocracy project", Applied Communication Research, 23 (2): 93–107, doi:10.1080/00909889509365417.
  • Page, BI (1996), Kim muhokama qiladi? Mass Media in Modern Democracy, Chikago: Chikago universiteti matbuoti.
  • Rheingold, H (1993), The virtual community. Homesteading on the electronic frontier, O'qish.
  • Rice, RE; Williams, F (1984), "Theories old and new: The study of new media", in Rice, RE (ed.), The new media: Communication, research, and technology, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, pp. 55–80.
  • Ross, C (2007), Considering and communicating more world views: New directions for the spiral of silence (conference papers), 1, National Communication Association.
  • Sassenberg, K (2002), "Common bond and common identity groups on the Internet: Attachment and normative behaviors in on-topic and off-topic chats", Guruhlar dinamikasi: nazariya, tadqiqot va amaliyot, 6 (1): 27–37, doi:10.1037/1089-2699.6.1.27.
  • Scheufele, Dietram A; Moy, P (2000), "Twenty-five years of the spiral of silence: A conceptual review and empirical outlook", Xalqaro jamoatchilik fikrini o'rganish jurnali, 12 (1): 3–28, doi:10.1093/ijpor/12.1.3, ISSN  0954-2892.
  • ——— (2007), "Opinion climates, spirals of silence, and biotechnology: Public opinion as a heuristic for scientific decision making", in Brossard, D; Shanahan, J; Nesbit, TC (eds.), The public, the media, and agricultural biotechnology: An international casebook, Kembrij, MA: Oksford universiteti matbuoti, pp. 231–41
  • Schmierback, M; Boyl, deputat; McLeod, DM (2005), "Civic attachment in the aftermath of September 11", Ommaviy aloqa va jamiyat, 8 (4): 323–46, doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0804_3.
  • Shanahan, J; Scheufele, Dietram A; Yang, Fang; Hizi, S (2004), "Cultivation and spiral of silence effects:the case of smoking", Ommaviy aloqa va jamiyat, 7 (4): 413–28, doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0704_3.
  • Qisqa, J; Uilyams, E; Christie, B (1976), The social psychology of telecommunications, Nyu York: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Sleek, S (1998), "Isolation increases with Internet use", APA Monitor, 29 (1): 1.
  • Spencer, Anthony; Stephen, Croucher (2008), "Basque Nationalism and the Spiral of Silence", Xalqaro aloqa gazetasi, 70 (2): 137–53, doi:10.1177/1748048507086909.
  • Sproull, L; Kiesler, S (1992), Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization, Kembrij, MA: MIT Press.
  • Stromer-Galley, J (2002), "New voices in the political sphere: A comparative analysis of interpersonal and online political talk", Javnost/The Public, 9 (2): 23–42, doi:10.1080/13183222.2002.11008798.
  • Wallace, P (1999), Internet psixologiyasi, Kembrij, MA: Kembrij universiteti matbuoti.
  • Wanta, W; Dimitrova, D (2000), Chatrooms and the spiral of silence: An examination of online discussions during the final 1996 U.S. presidential debate (paper), Acapulco, MX: The International Communication Association.
  • Warren, ME (2001), "What should we expect from more democracy? Radically democratic responses to politics", Siyosiy nazariya, 24 (2): 241–70, doi:10.1177/0090591796024002004.
  • Williams, E (1977), "Experimental comparison of face-to-face and mediated communication: A review", Psixologik byulleten, 84 (5): 963–76, doi:10.1037/0033-2909.84.5.963.
  • Witschge, T (2002), Online Deliberation: Possibilities of the Internet for deliberative democracy (paper), Nijmegen, NL: The Euricom Colloquium Electronic Networks & Democratic Engagement.