Reading a Blog When Empowered to Comment: Posting, Lurking, and Non-Interactive Reading

References

• Alexander, P. A., & Jetton, T. L. (2000). Learning from text: A multidimensional and developmental perspective. Handbook of reading research, 3, 285–310.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Ladwig, P. (2014). The “nasty effect:” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19, 373–387.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. New York, NY: General Learning Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58, 707–731.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bernard, R., Abrami, P., Borokhovski, E., Wade, C. A., Tamim, R., Surkes, M., & Bethel, E. (2009). A meta-analysis of three types of interaction treatments in distance education. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1243–1289.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braten, I., & Strømso, H. I. (2003). A longitudinal think-aloud study of spontaneous strategic processing during the reading of multiple expository texts. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 16, 195–218.
   Google Scholar
• Cox, R., McKendree, J., Tobin, R., Lee, J., & Mayes, T. (1999). Vicarious learning from dialogue and discourse. Instructional Science, 27, 431–458.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craig, S. D., Driscoll, D. M., & Gholson, B. (2004). Constructing knowledge from dialog in an intelligent tutoring system: Interactive learning, vicarious learning, and pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 163–183.
   Google Scholar
• Driscoll, D. M., Craig, S. D., Gholson, B., Ventura, M., Hu, X., & Graesser, A. C. (2003). Vicarious learning: Effects of overhearing dialogue and monologue-like discourse in a virtual tutoring session. Journal of Educating Computing Research, 29, 431–450.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. S. (1991). Democracy and deliberation: New directions for democratic reform. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. S. (1995). The voice of the people: Public opinion and democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. S. (1996). The televised deliberative poll: An experiment in democracy. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546, 132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fishkin, J. S., & Luskin, R. C. (2005). Experimenting with a democratic ideal: Deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica, 40, 284–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E. (1999). Listening in on monologues and dialogues. Discourse Processes, 27, 35–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox Tree, J. E., & Mayer, S. A. (2008). Overhearing single and multiple perspectives. Discourse Processes, 45, 160–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gernsbacher, M. A. (2014). Internet-based communication. Discourse Processes, 51, 359–373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerrig, R. J. (1993). Experiencing narrative worlds: On the psychological activities of reading. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., Johnson, P. E., & Sprague, J. (2002). Environments, political dynamics, and the survival of disagreement. Journal of Politics, 64, 1–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., Mendez, J. M., & Osborn, T. (2004). Disagreement, ambivalence, and engagement: The political consequences of heterogeneous networks. Political Psychology, 25, 65–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, D., & Lao, J. (1996). Effects of evidence on attitudes: Is polarization the norm? Psychological Science, 7, 115–120.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lalljee, M., & Evans, G. (1998). Political talk and the stability and consistency of political orientation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 203–212.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lampe, C., & Johnston, E. (2005). Follow the (slash) dot: Effects of feedback on new members in an online community. In Proceedings of the 2005 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work (pp. 11–20). Sannibel Island, FL: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Linderholm, T., & van den Broek, P. (2002). The effects of reading purpose and working memory capacity on the processing of expository text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 778–784.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Klusewitz, M. A. (1993). College students' conditional knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 239–252.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effect of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 2098–2109.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luskin, R. C., & Fishkin, J. S. (1998). Deliberative polling, public opinion, and democracy: The case of the National Issues Convention. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Boston, MA, September 2–6.
   Google Scholar
• Luskin, R. C., Fishkin, J. S., & Jowell, R. (2002). Considered opinions: Deliberative polling in Britain. British Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 455–488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLeod, J. M., Scheufele, D. A., Moy, P., Horowitz, E. M., Holbert, R. L., Zhang, W., … Zubric, J. (1999). Understanding deliberation. Communication Research, 26, 743.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M., & Jones, K. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Technical Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
   Google Scholar
• Muller, M. (2012). Lurking as personal trait or situational disposition: Lurking and contributing in enterprise social media. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 253–256). Seattle, WA: Association for Computing Machinery.
   Google Scholar
• Narvaez, D., van den Broek, P., & Ruiz, A. B. (1999). The influence of reading purpose on inference generation and comprehension in reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 488.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2001). Why lurkers lurk. In Americas Conference on Information Systems (pp. 1–10). Available at http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2001/294/.
   Google Scholar
• Nonnecke, B., Andrews, D., & Preece, J. (2006). Non-public and public online community participation: Needs, attitudes, and behavior. Electronic Commerce Research, 6, 7–22.
   Google Scholar
• Nonnecke, B., Preece, J., Andrews, D., & Voutour, R. (2004). Online lurkers tell why. In Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (p. 321). Available at http://aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2004/321/.
   Google Scholar
• Person, N. K., Burke, D. R., & Graesser, A. C. (2003, June). RudeTutor: A face threatening agent. Presented at the 13th Annual Meeting of the Society for Text and Discourse, Madrid, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Pinter, A., Oblak, T., & Krizan, J. (2004). Information, debate, and opinion change online: Deliberative transformations of opinion in computer-mediated discussions. Medij Istraz, 10, 51–74.
   Google Scholar
• Purcell, K., Rainie, L., Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T., & Olmstead, K. (2010). Understanding the participatory news consumer. Pew Internet and American Life Project, 1, 19–21.
   Google Scholar
• Rafaeli, S., Ravid, G., & Soroka, V. (2004). De-lurking in virtual communities: A social communication network approach to measuring the effects of social and cultural capital. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Washington, DC: IEEE.
   Google Scholar
• Royer, J. M., Carlo, M. S., Dufresne, R., & Mestre, J. (1996). The assessment of levels of domain expertise while reading. Cognition and Instruction, 14, 373–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schober, M. F., & Clark, H. H. (1989). Understanding by addressees and overhearers. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 211–232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schober, M. F., Conrad, F. G., Antoun, C., Ehlen, P., Fail, S., Hupp, A. L., … Zhang, C. (in press). Precision and disclosure in text and voice interviews on smartphones. PLOS ONE.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A. (2009, April 15). The Internet’s role in campaign 2008. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/04/15/the-internets-role-in-campaign-2008/.
   Google Scholar
• Strømso, H., Bråten, I., & Britt, M. A. (2010). Reading multiple texts about climate change: The relationship between memory for sources and text comprehension. Learning and Instruction, 20, 192–204.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sundar, S. S. (2000). Multimedia effects on processing and perception of online news: A study of picture, audio, and video downloads. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77, 480–499.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers' goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory & Cognition, 29, 1081–1087.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, D., Zhou, L., Briggs, R. O., & Nunamaker, Jr., J. F. (2006). Instructional video in e-learning: Assessing the impact of interactive video on learning effectiveness. Information & Management, 43, 15–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar