Dialogic strategies and outcomes: An analysis of environmental advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles

doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.002

Public Relations Review

Volume 35, Issue 3, September 2009, Pages 317-319

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2009.05.002 Get rights and content

Abstract

Previous studies of advocacy groups’ Web sites suggest that the use of dialogic strategies could lead to greater dialogic communication. This study examined whether dialogic strategies utilized by environmental advocacy groups via their social networking profiles lead to greater dialogic engagement between organizations and visitors. This study offers the first examination of the relationship between the creation of an online space for dialogue and actual dialogic engagement by identifying and measuring six dialogic outcomes.

Introduction

Dialogue refers to “any negotiated exchange of ideas and opinions” (Kent & Taylor, 1998, p. 325) and represents efforts by parties in a relationship to engage in an honest, open, and ethically based give and take. A stream of research by Kent, Taylor, and White investigating organizations’ use of dialogic principles in online communication has identified the principles necessary for fostering dialogic communication online (Kent and Taylor, 1998, Kent et al., 2003, Taylor et al., 2001). Recent studies have extended this line of inquiry to Web 2.0 by investigating the use of dialogic principles in weblogs (e.g., Seltzer and Mitrook, 2007, Traynor et al., 2008). Sweetser and Lariscy (2008) examined candidates’ use of Facebook during the 2006 midterm election; they proposed that Facebook has immense potential for dialogic communication. These studies suggest that organizations are not adequately utilizing the Web to generate dialogic communication; there are gaps between organizational relationship-building goals, implementation of online strategy, and actual dialogic engagement.

Social networking sites provide organizations with a space to interact with key publics and to allow users to engage with one another on topics of mutual interest; this should provide the ideal conditions necessary for stimulating dialogic communication. This study sought to determine to what degree advocacy organizations are utilizing dialogic strategies on their social networking profiles as well as the degree to which these strategies are related to actual dialogic outcomes i.e., metrics that indicate that dialogue between the organization and stakeholders is taking place. Two types of dialogic outcomes were measured in this study: (1) on-site posts by the organization and users and (2) the extent of the social network linked to organization profiles.

Section snippets

Methodology

A purposive sample of 50 Facebook profiles created by environmental advocacy groups was content analyzed by two trained coders using an 82-item questionnaire. Intercoder reliability scores were calculated using Scott's Pi (Holsti, 1969) for dialogic strategies and Holsti's coefficient of reliability (Holsti, 1969) for dialogic outcomes. Scores ranged from 61% to 87% with Scott's Pi and 90% to 100% with Holsti's.

Content categories were developed based on the dialogic communication literature (

Findings

Frequency counts were generated to determine the extent to which social networking profiles used the dialogic strategies. Organizations typically used three features of usefulness to members (median = 3); one feature of usefulness to media, ease of interface, and conservation of visitors (median = 1); and no features of generation of return visits, dialogic loop, and organization engagement (median = 0).

A Spearman's rho correlation was conducted to identify significant relationships between dialogic

Discussion

Most of the advocacy organizations in our study seem to adopt the position that the mere creation of an interactive space via a social networking profile is sufficient for facilitating dialogue. However, these organizations are missing a significant opportunity to build mutually beneficial relationships with stakeholders by failing to effectively utilize the full gambit of dialogic strategies that social networking sites offer. As with Web sites and weblogs, advocacy groups are not taking

Conclusion

Our study extends the investigation of online dialogic communication by examining the application of dialogic principles via the Facebook profiles of environmental advocacy organizations. Social networking sites offer dialogic opportunities that need to be included in a re-conceptualization of the dialogic principles for studying Web 2.0. Additionally, our study linked dialogic strategies to dialogic outcomes. Future research should continue to examine whether dialogic strategy use is

References (7)

M.L. Kent et al.
Building dialogic relationships through the World Wide Web
Public Relations Review
(1998)
M.L. Kent et al.
The relationship between Web site design and organizational responsiveness to stakeholders
Public Relations Review
(2003)
T. Seltzer et al.
The dialogic potential of weblogs in relationship building
Public Relations Review
(2007)

There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (421)

Timeliness, responsiveness and the human voice: The effects of dialogic strategies and the mediating role of perceived communication ethicality on social media relationship building
2023, Public Relations Review
This study investigates how social media can be better managed to cultivate positive organization-public relationships. It advances an expanded and integrated conceptual model to test how the communication features of corporate pages on social networking sites may influence publics’ perception of the organization’s communication ethicality, which further predicts organization-public relationships as a compound index of trust, commitment, and satisfaction. The results, based on structural equation modeling, showed that three important communication strategies are success factors that could shape perceptions of communication ethicality: timeliness, responsiveness, and the use of human voice in a dialogic framework. In particular, publics’ perception of the organization’s communication ethicality emerged as a key mediator driving communication effects to foster positive relationships with stakeholders in an online environment.
Dialogic communication on local government social media during the first wave of COVID-19: Evidence from the health commissions of prefecture-level cities in China
2023, Computers in Human Behavior
Although some scholars have explored the level and determinants of Dialogic Communication on Government Social Media (DCGSM), none have conducted their studies in the context of public crisis. The current study contributes to the understanding on DCGSM by 16,822 posts crawled from the official Sina Weibo accounts of 104 Chinese health commissions in prefecture-level cities during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results show that Chinese local government agencies have great variations in their DCGSM during the pandemic and the overall performance is poor. Furthermore, Chinese local governments prefer to conserve visitors and generate return visits, rather than dialogic loops development and the usefulness of information enhancement. The findings suggest that both public pressure and peer pressure contribute to the DCGSM of Chinese local governments during the public health crisis. In addition, the effect of public pressure is stronger than that of the peer pressure, indicating that local government agencies have experienced more demand-pull DCGSM.
NPOs’ Voice in CSR Partnership: An Exploratory Study Using Topic Modeling
2024, International Journal of Business Communication
Exploring online coalition building: A longitudinal analysis of interorganizational networks of nonprofit homeless shelters on social media
2024, Journal of Civil Society
Social change strategies of Jewish-Orthodox women activists in Israel
2024, Journal of Community Practice
The employment of dialogic principles in the websites and social media platforms of museums in China
2024, Museum Management and Curatorship

View all citing articles on Scopus

¹: Tel.: +1 806 742 6500.

View full text

Research in briefDialogic strategies and outcomes: An analysis of environmental advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles

Abstract

Introduction

Section snippets

Methodology

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion

Public Relations Review

Public Relations Review

Public Relations Review

Research in brief
Dialogic strategies and outcomes: An analysis of environmental advocacy groups’ Facebook profiles