IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/bjposi/v48y2018i02p407-425_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Talking It Out: Political Conversation and Knowledge Gaps in Unequal Urban Contexts

Author

Listed:
  • Smith, Amy Erica

Abstract

In many contemporary urban spaces, political information accrues to high status neighborhoods. This might exacerbate political inequality as the information-rich and information-poor each talk primarily with others like themselves. When information is specific and broadly diffused through the media, however, the convenience and low cognitive costs of everyday conversation could be especially helpful for the disadvantaged. This article shows how political conversations intensify or ameliorate spatial knowledge gaps, using a six-wave panel survey in fifty Brazilian neighborhoods between 2002 and 2006. Multilevel models demonstrate that conversation was more frequent in high education neighborhoods, but had a greater impact on specific, factual knowledge in low-education neighborhoods, leading to shrinking knowledge gaps. However, conversation slightly widened spatial gaps in socially perceived general knowledge.

Suggested Citation

  • Smith, Amy Erica, 2018. "Talking It Out: Political Conversation and Knowledge Gaps in Unequal Urban Contexts," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(2), pages 407-425, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:48:y:2018:i:02:p:407-425_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0007123415000721/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sara M. Constantino & Alicia D. Cooperman & Thiago M. Q. Moreira, 2021. "Voting in a global pandemic: Assessing dueling influences of Covid‐19 on turnout," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2210-2235, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:bjposi:v:48:y:2018:i:02:p:407-425_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.