International Journal of Public Opinion Research Advance Access originally published online on August 5, 2005
International Journal of Public Opinion Research 2006 18(1):3-30; doi:10.1093/ijpor/edh100
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Engagement Model of Opinion Leadership: Testing Validity Within a European Context
Erik C. Nisbet is a doctoral student in the Department of Communication at Cornell University. His primary research interests are comparative political communication, mass communication, media sociology, and opinion formation. He is also a member of the Media & Society Research Group (http://www.comm.cornell.edu/msrg/msrg.html).
Address correspondence to Erik C. Nisbet, Media and Society Research Group, 338 Kennedy Hall, Department of Communication, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA, E-mail: ecn1{at}cornell.edu
Explicating and measuring opinion leadership continues to be an important theoretical topic, as personal influence and interpersonal discussion are widely recognized as shaping public opinion and political behavior. However, the concept of opinion leadership arose out of empirical research conducted primarily within the USA. Whether it may be applied to other national contexts remains to be fully explicated. Furthermore, media information-seeking behaviors of opinion leaders, such as newspaper use or television exposure, seem to be culturally contingent based upon the scant cross-national research to date. This paper examines the ecological and constructive validity of the engagement model of the opinion leadership developed within the USA. Employing the European Social Survey, I apply this model to fifteen European nations to assess its validity and explore how media information-seeking behaviors of opinion leaders may vary across national contexts. The findings suggest that the model may be most valid in Western European nations. Furthermore, the media use and behaviors of opinion leaders vary greatly across nations in Europe, though levels of interpersonal political discussion and specific individual socio-psychological traits do not.