Twitter: The electoral connection?

Social Science Computer Review

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 419-436

  Lassen, David S ^a   Brown, Adam R ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

communication; Congress; Internet; Twitter

Indexed keywords

EID: 81755187397     PISSN: 08944393     EISSN: 15528286     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0894439310382749     Document Type: Review

References (57)

1. Adler E. S.,Gent C. E.,Overmeyer C. B.The home style homepage: Legislator use of the World Wide Web for constituency contact.Legislative Studies Quarterly. 1998;23:585-595.
2. Ansolabehere S.,Iyengar S.,Simon A.,Valentino N.Does attack advertising demobilize the electorate?.American Political Science Review. 1994;88:829-838.
3. Ansolabehere S.,Snyder J. M.,Stewart C.Candidate positioning in U.S. house elections.American Journal of Political Science. 2001;45:136-159.
4. Bartels L. M.Partisanship and voting behavior, 1952-1996.American Journal of Political Science. 2000;44:35-50.
5. BresnahanJ. (2008). House dems turn out the lights but GOP keeps talking. Politico, August 1. Retrieved April 10, 2010, fromhttp://dyn.politico.com/blogs/thecrypt/index.cfm/CurrentPage/10/category/Leadership.
6. Cook T. E.Making laws and making news: Media strategies in the U.S. house of representatives. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press; 1990:.
7. Cover A. D.Contacting congressional constituents: Some patterns of perquisite use.American Journal of Political Science. 1980;24:125-135.
8. Cover A. D.,Brumberg B. S.Baby books and ballots: The impact of Congressional mail on constituent opinion.American Political Science Review. 1982;76:347-359.
9. Cox G. W.,McCubbins M. D.Legislative leviathan: Party government in the house. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2007:.
10. Davis F. L.The declining role of the frank in house elections: The withering effect of sunshine?.Polity. 2000;32:415-428.
11. Dolan J.,Kropf J. S.Credit claiming from the U.S. house: Gendered communication styles?.Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 2004;9:41-59.
12. Esterling K.,Neblo M.,Lazer D.Home(page) style.International Journal of E-government Research. 2005;2:48-62.
13. Evans C. L.,Oleszek W. J., The Internet institutional change. In J. A. Thurber & C. C. Campbell (Eds.), Congress and the Internet. Thurber J. A.Campbell C. C., ed. New York, NY: Prentice Hall; 2003:99-123.
14. Fenno R. F.Home style: House members in their districts. New York, NY: Little, Brown; 1978:.
15. Fiorina M.Divided government. New York, NY: Longman; 2002:.
16. FitchBradKathyGoldschmidt. 2005. "Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is coping with the surge in citizen advocacy."Congressional Management Foundation. Retrieved August 29, 2010, from, http://www.cmfweb.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid.
17. Flowers J. F.,Haynes A. A.,Crespin M. H.The media, the campaign, and the message.American Journal of Political Science. 2003;47:259-273.
18. George Washington University. (2009). 2009 Social media & online usage study. Retrieved August 2, 2010, fromhttp://www.gwu.edu/~newsctr/10/pdfs/gw_cision_sm_study_09.PDF.
19. GonyeaD. (2009). GOP governors meeting decidedly upbeat. NPR, November 19. Retrieved April 12, 2010, fromhttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120562858&ft=1&f=2781501.
20. GrahamSarah. 2010. "Sarah Palin joins ranks of Twitter bloopers." Telegraph. Retrieved August 30, 2010, fromhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/7900138/Sarah-Palin-joins-ranks-of-Twitter-bloopers.html.
21. Greco Larson S.Information and learning in a Congressional district: A social experiment.American Journal of Political Science. 1990;34:1102-1118.
22. Herrnson P. S.,Stokes-Brown A. K.,Hindman M.Campaign politics and the digital divide: Constituency characteristics, strategic considerations, and candidate Internet use in state legislative elections.Political Research Quarterly. 2007;60:31-42.
23. HorriganJ. (2007). A typology of information and communication technology users. Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved April 12, 2010, fromhttp://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2007/A-Typology-of-Information-and-Communication-Technology-Users.aspx.
24. Huber G. A.,Arceneaux K.Identifying the persuasive effects of presidential advertising.American Journal of Political Science. 2007;51:957-977.
25. Jarvis Sharon E.,Kristen Wilkerson."Congress and the Internet: Messages on the homepages of the U.S. House of Representatives, 1996 and 2001.".Journal of Computer Mediated Communication. 2005;10 (2):.
26. Johnson D.Congress online: Bridging the gap between citizens and their representatives. New York, NY: Routledge; 2004:.
27. Kenny C.,McBurnett M.Up close and personal: Campaign contact and candidate spending in U.S. house elections.Political Research Quarterly. 1997;50:75-96.
28. Krehbiel K.Where's the party?.British Journal of Political Science. 1993;23:235-266.
29. Labott Elise.2009. State Department to Twitter: Keep Iranian tweets coming. CNN. Retreived August 30, 2010, fromhttp://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/16/state-department-to-twitter-keep-iranian-tweets-coming/.
30. Lipinski D. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press; 2004:.
31. Lipinski D.,Neddenriep G.Using "new" media to get "old" media coverage: How members of Congress utilize their web sites to court journalists.The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 2004;9:7-21.
32. Lipinski D.,Neddenriep G.,Kedrowski K. M.Who makes it easy? Courting journalists through Congressional websites.The Journal of Political Science. 2007;35:61-94.
33. Mann T. E.Unsafe at any margin: Interpreting Congressional elections. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research; 1978:.
34. ManningJ. E. (2010). Membership of the 111th Congress: A profile. Congressional Research Service. Retrieved April 12, 2010, fromhttp://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid=%260BL%29PL%3B%3D%0A.
35. Mayhew D. R.Congress: The electoral connection. New York, NY: Yale University Press; 1974:.
36. McAdams J. C.,Johannes J. R.Constituency attentiveness in the house: 1977-1982.Journal of Politics. 1985;47:1108-1139.
37. McCarty N.,Poole K. T.,Rosenthal H.The hunt for party discipline in Congress.American Political Science Review. 2001;95:673-687.
38. Merrill S., III,Adams J.Centrifugal incentives in multi-candidate elections.Journal of Theoretical Politics. 2003;14:275-300.
39. O'ConnorP. (2008). House GOP revolts over gas prices. Politico, August 1. Retrieved April 10, 2010, fromhttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0808/12252.html.
40. O'ConnorP. (2009). Boehner lost vote, won power. Politico. Retrieved April 12, 2010, fromhttp://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18144.html.
41. Owen D.,Davis R.,Strickler V. J.Congress and the Internet.The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics. 1999;4:10-29.
42. Parker D. C. W.,Goodman C., 2010, April., Representation in an electronic age: Explaining members' activities through electronic newsletters. Paper presented at the annual meeting of theMidwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
43. Parker G. R.,Parker S. L.Correlates and effects of attention to district by U.S. house members.Legislative Studies Quarterly. 1985;10:223-242.
44. Poole K. T.,Rosenthal H.D-NOMINATE after 10 years: A comparative update to Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll-Call Voting.Legislative Studies Quarterly. 2001;26:5-29.
45. Rainie Lee,Aaron Smith. 2008. "The Internet and the 2008 election."Pew Internet and American Life Project. Retrieved August 30, 2010, fromhttp://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/The-Internet-and-the-2008-Election.aspx.
46. Ridout T. N.,Shah D. V.,Goldstein K. M.,Franz M. M.Evaluating measures of campaign advertising exposure on political learning.Political Behavior. 2004;26:201-225.
47. Snyder J. M.,Groseclose T.Estimating party influence in Congressional roll-call voting.American Journal of Political Science. 2000;44:193-211.
48. Steger W. P.,Kelly S. Q.,Wrighton J. M.Campaigns and political marketing. New York, NY: Routledge; 2006:.
49. StelterB. (2008). House goes home, but video goes online via cellphone. New York Times, August 4. Retrieved April 10, 2010, fromhttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/04/business/media/04cspan.html.
50. Stromer-Galley Jennifer."On-line interaction and why candidates avoid it.".Journal of Communication. 2000;50 (4): 111-32.
51. Tedesco John C."Examining Internet interactivity effects on young adult political information efficacy.".American Behavioral Scientist. 2007;50 (9): 1183-94.
52. Vavreck L.The reasoning voter meets the strategic candidate: Signals and specificity in campaign advertising, 1998.American Politics Research. 2001;29:507-529.
53. Weisberg H. F.A multidimensional conceptualization of party identification.Political Behavior. 1980;2:33-60.
54. Williams C. B.,Gulati G. J., The evolution of online campaigning in senate elections 2000-2004. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association; 2006, AprilChicago, IL; 2006, April.
55. Williams C. B.,Gulati G. J., Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and Congressional elections 2006, 2008. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association; 2009, SeptemberToronto, Canada; 2009, September.
56. Williams C. B.,Gulati G. J., Communicating with constituents in 140 characters or less: Twitter and the diffusion of technology innovation in the United States Congress. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association; 2010, AprilChicago, IL; 2010, April.
57. Yiannakis D. E.House members' communication styles: Newsletters and press releases.Journal of Politics. 1982;44:1049-1071.