Perceiving digital space as a parallel parliament in Jordan: symbolic representation, public pressure, and opinion formation among digitally active users

Introduction This study examines how digitally active respondents in Jordan perceive digital space, particularly social media platforms, as a parallel public arena that enables popular expression, shapes public discussion, and contributes to opinion formation. The study draws on digital public sphere theory, agenda-setting theory, and the logic of connective action to assess the extent to which respondents perceive selected symbolic and communicative functions in the Jordanian context. Methods A descriptive-analytical design was used based on an online questionnaire. Data were collected between 21 October 2025 and 29 March 2026, producing 210 valid responses from digitally active users. After data cleaning, the quantitative analysis focused on 17 items across three dimensions: public discussion, digital space as a metaphorical parallel parliament, and public opinion formation, in addition to two open-ended questions. The instrument showed high reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.897), while KMO = 0.908 and Bartlett’s test ( p < 0.001) indicated that the item matrix was statistically adequate for exploratory structural examination. Results Results indicate that respondents perceive digital platforms as a major source for following public events and expressing views on national issues. The overall mean reached 3.917 out of 5, with all dimensions statistically above the hypothetical mean. No statistically significant differences were observed by gender or age within this sample, while the limited educational-level difference should be interpreted cautiously because of uneven group sizes. Discussion The study does not claim that digital platforms constitute an institutional alternative to parliament. Rather, it argues that digitally active respondents perceive these platforms as performing selected symbolic functions associated with representation, agenda-setting, public pressure, and symbolic accountability. The ‘parallel parliament’ concept is therefore used as an interpretive metaphor grounded in users’ perceptions, not as evidence of formal political substitution.