Partisan alignments and political polarization online: A computational approach to understanding the French and US presidential elections

PLEAD 2013 - Proceedings of the Workshop on Politics, Elections and Data, Co-located with CIKM 2013

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 15-21

  Hanna, Alexander ^a   Wells, Chris ^a   Maurer, Peter ^b   Friedland, Lew ^a   Shah, Dhavan ^a   Matthes, Jörg ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

Author keywords

cross national comparison; networks; political polarization; politics; presidential debates; twitter

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH; COMPUTATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCE; CROSS-NATIONAL; POLITICAL PARTICIPATIONS; POLITICS; PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES; PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION; TWITTER;

ALIGNMENT; NETWORKS (CIRCUITS); POLARIZATION; SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

SOCIAL SCIENCES;

EID: 84888193180     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2508436.2508438     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. A. I. Abramowitz. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. Yale University Press, 2010.
2. N. Anstead and B. O'Loughlin. The emerging viewertariat and bbc question time: Television, debate, and real-time commenting online. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 16(4):440-462, 2011.
3. W. L. Bennett and A. Segerberg. The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5):739-768, 2012.
4. B. Bimber, A. J. Flanagin, and C. Stohl. Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15(4):365-388, 2005.
5. J. Bollen, A. Pepe, and H. Mao. Modeling public mood and emotion: Twitter sentiment and socio-economic phenomena. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2011.
6. M. D. Conover, J. Ratkiewicz, M. Francisco, B. Gonçalves, A. Flammini, and F. Menczer. Political polarization on twitter. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2011.
7. J. DiGrazia, K. McKelvey, J. Bollen, and F. Rojas. More tweets, more votes: Social media as a quantitative indicator of political behavior. 2013.
8. B. Gleason. #occupy wall street: Exploring informal learning about a social movement on twitter. American Behavioral Scientist, 2013.
9. A. Hanna, B. Sayre, L. Bode, J. Yang, and D. Shah. Mapping the political twitterverse: Candidates and their followers in the midterms. In Proceedings of 5th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2011.
10. D. Lazer, A. Pentland, L. Adamic, S. Aral, A.-L. Barabási, D. Brewer, N. Christakis, N. Contractor, J. Fowler, M. Gutmann, T. Jebara, G. King, M. Macy, D. Roy, and M. Van Alstyne. Computational social science. Science, 323(5915):721-723, 2009.
11. P. T. Metaxas, E. Mustafaraj, and D. Gayo-Avello. How (not) to predict elections. In Privacy, security, risk and trust (PASSAT), 2011 IEEE third international conference on and 2011 IEEE third international conference on social computing (SocialCom), pages 165-171. IEEE, 2011.
12. F. Morstatter, J. Pfeffer, H. Liu, and K. M. Carley. Is the sample good enough? comparing data from twitter's streaming api with twitter's firehose. In Proceedings of 7th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2013.
13. B. O'Connor, R. Balasubramanyan, B. R. Routledge, and N. A. Smith. From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2010.
14. Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. One-in-ten 'dual-screened' the presidential debate, 2012. http://www.people-press.org/2012/ 10/11/one-in-ten-dual-screened-the-presidential-debate/.
15. M. Prior. Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarizes elections. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
16. D. A. Shamma, L. Kennedy, and E. F. Churchill. Tweet the debates: understanding community annotation of uncollected sources. In Proceedings of the first SIGMM workshop on Social media, pages 3-10. ACM, 2009.
17. N. J. Stroud. Niche News: The Politics of News Choice: The Politics of News Choice. Oxford University Press, USA, 2011.
18. C. R. Sunstein. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press, 2009.
19. The Nielsen Company. In the us, tablets are tv buddies while ereaders make great bedfellows, 2011. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2011/in-the- u-s-tablets-are-tv-buddies-while-ereaders-make-great-bedfellows.html.
20. Z. Tufekci and C. Wilson. Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from tahrir square. Journal of Communication, 62(2):363-379, 2012.
21. A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M. Welpe. Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM). AAAI, 2010.
22. I. Weber, A.-M. Popescu, and M. Pennacchiotti. Data-driven political science. In Proceedings of the sixth ACM international conference on Web search and data mining, WSDM '13, pages 777-778, New York, NY, USA, 2013. ACM.
23. S. Yardi and D. Boyd. Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on twitter. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5):316-327, 2010.