Work plan:

• Watch the introductory video.
• Read the materials.
• Do the quizz.
• Answer the open survey on the website about barriers and inequalities.
• Discuss the results on Twitter.

Introductory video

• Video: Jennifer Earl

Recommended readings:

• Preliminary work on EURYKA WP7
• Armingeon, K. & Schädel, L. (2015) Social Inequality in Political Participation: The Dark Sides of Individualisation. West European Politics, 38(1), pp. 1-27. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/01402382.2014.929341?needAccess=true
• Andersson, E. (2015). Situational political socialization: a normative approach to young people’s adoption and acquisition of political preferences and skills. Journal of Youth Studies, 18(8), pp. 967–983. Available at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13676261.2015.1020926
• Hargittai, E. & Hinnant, A (2008). Digital Inequality Differences in Young Adults’ Use of the Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), pp. 602-621. Available at: http://www.eszter.com/research/pubs/A25.Hargittai.Hinnant-DigitalInequality.pdf

Other suggested readings:

• Anduiza, E., Gallego, A. & Jorba, L. (2012). Internet use and the Political Knowledge Gap in Spain. In Revista Internacional de Sociología, 70 (1), 129-151. Madrid: CSIC. Available at: http://revintsociologia.revistas.csic.es/index.php/revintsociologia/article/download/431/454
• Hargittai, E. & Walejko, G (2008). The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information, Communication & Society, 11(August 2012), pp.239–256. Available at: https://soc334technologyandsociety.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/hargittaiwalejko2008.pdf
• Kim, S. (2008). “Testing the Knowledge Gap Hypothesis in South Korea: Traditional News Media, the Internet, and Political Learning”. In International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 20 (2), 193-210. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available at http://ijpor.oxfordjournals.org/content/20/2/193.full
• Klandermans, B. & Oegema, D (1987). Potentials, Networks, Motivations and Barriers: Steps Towards Participation in Social Movements. American Sociological Review, 52(4), pp. 519-531. Available at: https://www.ssc.wisc.edu/~oliver/SOC924/Articles/KlandermansOegema1987.pdf
• Marien, S. et al. (2010). Inequalities in Non-Institutionalized Forms of Political Participation. A Multilevel Analysis for 25 countries. Political Studies, 58(1), pp. 187-213. Available at: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/bitstream/123456789/206523/2/24420-
• Van Deursen, A. & van Dijk, J. (2013). “The digital divide shifts to differences in usage”. In New Media & Society, 16 (3), 507-526. London: SAGE Publications. Available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/fbbd/3a62706f542b5eed4406abbec3237ed8363a.pdf?_ga=2.217384403.418071096.1523276399-883633420.1523276399http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444813487959
• Yang, L. & Zhiyong Lan, G. (2010). “Internet’s impact on expert–citizen interactions in public policymaking—A meta analysis”. In Government Information Quarterly, 27 (4), 431-441. London: Elsevier. Available at https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f1dd/0872399b4a6cb23970fdfcec74c298b47292.pdf

Special monograph. Main barriers and inequalities of online political participation

We open with an explanation of the concept of the digital divide, followed by a description of how the internet causes inequalities and differential factors in political participation, as well as some initiatives to fight against the digital divide..