Variation in the Relationship Between Digital Media Use and Political Participation in U.S. Elections Over Time, 1996–2012: Does Obama’s Reelection Change the Picture?

Journal of Information Technology and Politics

Volumn 12, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 74-87

  Copeland, Lauren ^a   Bimber, Bruce ^b  

^a JOHN CARROLL UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

American National Election Studies (ANES); civic engagement; digital media; Internet; participation; political behavior; political talk; social media; voting

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923139416     PISSN: 19331681     EISSN: 1933169X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/19331681.2014.975391     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Arceneaux, K., & Johnson, M. (2013). Changing minds or changing channels: Partisan news in an age of choice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
2. Bennett, W. L., & Segerberg, A. (2013). The logic of connective action: Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3. Bimber, B. (2001). Information and political engagement in America: The search for political effects of the Internet. Political Research Quarterly, 54, 53–67. doi:10.1080/10584600902854363
4. Bimber, B. (2003). Information and American democracy: Technology in the evolution of political power. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
5. Bimber, B. (2012). Digital media in the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the personalized political communication environment. Lecture presented at the Comparing Online Democracy and Elections Conference, Portcullis House, Parliament of the UK, London, Nov. 21.
6. Bimber, B., Cantijoch, M., Copeland, L., & Gibson, R. (2014). Digital media and political participation: The moderating role of political interest across acts and over time. Social Science Computer Review, advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0894439314526559
7. Bimber, B., & Copeland, L. (2013). Digital media and traditional political participation over time in the U.S. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 10(2), 125–137.
8. Bimber, B., & Davis, R. (2003). Campaigning online: The Internet in U.S. elections. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
9. Bimber, B., Flanagin, A., & Stohl, C. (2012). Collective action in organization: Interacting and engaging in an era of technological change. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
10. Bond, R., Fariss, C., Jones, J., Kramer, A., Marlow, C., Settle, J., & Fowler J. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489, 295–297.
11. Boulianne, S. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26(2), 193–211. doi:10.1080/10584600902854363
12. Brundidge, J. (2010). Political discussion and news use in the contemporary public sphere: The accessibility and traversability of the Internet. Javnost—The Public, 17(2), 63–82.
13. Cho, J., Shah, D. V., McLeod, J. M., McLeod, D. M., Scholl, R. M., & Gotlieb, M. R. (2009). Campaigns, reflection, and deliberation: Advancing an o-s-r-o-r model of communication effects. Communication Theory, 19(1),66–88. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.01333.x
14. Gil de Zúñiga, H., Copeland, L., & Bimber, B. (2013). Political consumerism: Civic engagement and the social media connection. New Media & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1461444813487960
15. Hayes, A. F. (2005). Statistical methods for communication science. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
16. King, G., Tomz, M., & Wittenberg, J. (2000). Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science, 44(2), 347–367. doi:10.2307/2669316
17. Levendusky, M. (2013). How partisan media polarize America. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
18. Long, J. S. (1997). Regression models for categorical and limited dependent variables. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Long, J. S., & Freese, J. (2006). Regression models for categorical dependent variables using Stata. 2nd ed. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
20. McDonald, M. P. (2013). Voter turnout. Retrieved September 25, 2013 from United States Election Project Web site: http://elections.gmu.edu/voter_turnout.htm
21. Prior, M. (2007). Post-broadcast democracy: How media choice increases inequality in political involvement and polarized elections. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
22. Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2012). The state of the 2012 election--Mobile politics. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2012/Election-2012-Mobile.aspx
23. Steger, W. (2013). A transformational political marketing campaign. In W. J. Crotty (Ed.), Winning the presidency, 2012 (pp. 74–89). Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.
24. Stroud, N. J. (2011). Niche news: The politics of news choice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
25. Tolbert, C., & McNeal, R. (2003). Unraveling the effects of the Internet on political participation? Political Research Quarterly, 56(2), 175–185. doi:10.1177/106591290305600206
26. Vaccari, C. (2010). “Technology is a commodity”: The Internet in the 2008 United States presidential election. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 7(4), 318–339.
27. Xenos, M., & Moy, P. (2007). Direct and differential effects of the Internet on political and civic engagement. Journal of Communication, 57(4), 704–718. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00364.x