Facebook, Twitter, and youth engagement: A quasi-experimental study of social media use and protest behavior using propensity score matching

International Journal of Communication Networks and Information Security

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 2046-2070

  Valenzuela, Sebastián ^a   Arriagada, Arturo ^b   Scherman, Andrés ^b  

^a PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^b UNIVERSIDAD DIEGO PORTALES   (Chile)

Author keywords

Matching; Political participation; Protest behavior; Social media; Social movements; Social ties

Indexed keywords

EID: 84928928220     PISSN: 20760930     EISSN: 2073607X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Adimark GfK. (2011). Encuesta: Evaluación gestión del gobierno [Survey: Evaluation of government performance]. Retrieved from http://www.adimark.cl/es/estudios/documentos/0_9_ev_gob_sept2011_.pdf
2. Anduiza, E., Cantijoch, M., & Gallego, A. (2009). Political participation and the Internet: A field essay. Information, Communication & Society, 12, 860-878. doi:10.1080/13691180802282720
3. Bakardjieva, M. (2011). Reconfiguring the mediapolis: New media and civic agency. New Media & Society, 14, 63-79. doi:10.1177/1461444811410398
4. Barrionuevo, A. (2011, August 4). With kiss-ins and dances, young Chileans push for reform. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/05/world/americas/05chile.html
5. Bennett, W. L. (2008). Changing citizenship in the digital age. In W. L. Bennett (Ed.), Civic life online: Learning how digital media can engage youth (pp. 1-24). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
6. Bimber, B., Flanagin, A. J., & Stohl, C. (2005). Reconceptualizing collective action in the contemporary media environment. Communication Theory, 15, 365-388. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2005.tb00340.x
7. Bond, R. M., Fariss, C. J., Jones, J. J., Kramer, A. D. I., Marlow, C., Settle, J. E., & Fowler, J. H. (2012). A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature, 489(7415), 295-298. doi:10.1038/nature11421
8. Boulianne, S. (2009). Does Internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26, 193-211. doi:10.1080/10584600902854363
9. Cabalín, C. (2014). Online and mobilized students: The use of Facebook in the Chilean student protests. Comunicar, 43, 25-33. doi:10.3916/C43-2014-02
10. Caliendo, M., & Kopeinig, S. (2008). Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. Journal of Economic Surveys, 22, 31-72. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6419.2007.00527.x
11. Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science, 329, 1194-1197. doi:10.1126/science.1185231
12. Chiang, Y.-S. (2007). Birds of moderately different feathers: Bandwagon dynamics and the threshold heterogeneity of network neighbors. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 31, 47-69. doi:10.1080/00222500601013536
13. Dalton, R. J., van Sickle, A., & Weldon, S. (2009). The individual-institutional nexus of protest behaviour. British Journal of Political Science, 40, 51-73. doi:10.1017/S000712340999038X
14. Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba S. (2002). Propensity score matching methods for non-experimental causal studies. Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 151-161. doi:10.1162/003465302317331982
15. Earl, J., & Kimport, K. (2011). Digitally enabled social change: Activism in the Internet age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends": Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1143-1168. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
17. Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., & Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102, 33-48. doi:10.1017/S000305540808009X
18. Gerber, A. S., Karlan, D., & Bergan, D. (2009). Does the media matter? A field experiment measuring the effect of newspapers on voting behavior and political opinions. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 1(2), 35-52. doi:10.1257/app.1.2.35
19. Gil de Zúñiga, H., Jung, N., & Valenzuela, S. (2012). Social media use for news and individuals' social capital, civic engagement, and political participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 319-336. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.x
20. Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Valenzuela, S. (2011). The mediating path to a stronger citizenship: Online and offline networks, weak ties, and civic engagement. Communication Research, 38, 397-421. doi:10.1177/0093650210384984
21. Gilbert, E., & Karahalios, K. (2009). Predicting tie strength with social media. In CHI '09: Proceedings of the 27th annual SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 211-220). New York, NY: ACM Press.
22. Ginsberg, J., Mohebbi, M. H., Patel, R. S., Brammer, L., Smolinski, M. S., & Brilliant, L. (2008). Detecting influenza epidemics using search engine query data. Nature, 457, 1012-1014. doi:10.1038/nature07634
23. González-Bailón, S., Borge-Holthoefer, J., Rivero, A., & Y. Moreno. (2011). The dynamics of protest recruitment through an online network. Nature Scientific Reports, 1, 197. doi:10.1038/srep00197
24. Gould, R. V. (1993). Collective action and network structure. American Sociological Review, 58, 182-196. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2095965
25. Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78, 1360-1380. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2776392
26. Groshek, J. (2012). Forecasting and observing: A cross-methodological consideration of Internet and mobile phone diffusion in the Egyptian revolt. International Communication Gazette, 74, 750-768. doi:10.1177/1748048512459147
27. Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people's online skills. First Monday, 7(4). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_4/hargittai/index.html
28. Harlow, S., & Johnson, T. (2011). The Arab Spring: Overthrowing the protest paradigm? How The New York Times, Global Voices and Twitter covered the Egyptian revolution. International Journal of Communication, 5, 1417-1434. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1239
29. Hipsher, P. L. (1996). Democratization and the decline of urban social movements in Chile and Spain. Comparative Politics, 28, 273-297. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/422208
30. Ho, D. E., Imai, K., King, G., & Stuart, E. A. (2007). Matching as nonparametric preprocessing for reducing model dependence in parametric causal inference. Political Analysis, 15, 199-236. doi:10.1093/pan/mpl013
31. Hoffman, L. H. (2006). Is Internet content different after all? A content analysis of mobilizing information in online and print newspapers. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83, 58-76. doi:10.1177/107769900608300105
32. Howard, P. N., Duffy, A., Freelon, D., Hussain, M., Mari, W., & Mazaid, M. (2011). Opening closed regimes: What was the role of social media during the Arab Spring? Seattle, WA: Project on Information Technology and Political Islam, University of Washington.
33. Howard, P. N., & Parks, M. R. (2012). Social media and political change: Capacity, constraint, and consequence. Journal of Communication, 62, 359-362. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01626.x
34. Iacus, S. M., King, G., & Porro, G. (2009). CEM: Coarsened exact matching software. Journal of Statistical Software, 30, 1-27. Retrieved from http://www.jstatsoft.org/v30/i09/
35. Johnson, P., & Yang, S. (2009, August). Uses and gratifications of Twitter: An examination of user motives and satisfaction of Twitter use. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Boston, MA.
36. Katz, E. (1957). The two-step flow of communication: An up-to-date report on an hypothesis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 21(1), 61-78. doi:10.1086/266687
37. Kitts, J. A. (2000). Mobilizing in black boxes: Social networks and participation in social movement organizations. Mobilization, 5, 241-257. Retrieved from: http://mobilization.metapress.com/link.asp?id=5408016w34215787.
38. Kobayashi, T., Ikeda, K. I., & Miyata, K. (2006). Social capital online: Collective use of the Internet and reciprocity as lubricants of democracy. Information, Communication & Society, 9, 582-611. doi:10.1080/13691180600965575
39. Koopmans, R. (2004). Protest in time and space: The evolution of waves of contention. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 19-46). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
40. Lee, E.-J., & Oh, S. Y. (2012). To personalize or depersonalize? When and how politicians' personalized tweets affect the public's reactions. Journal of Communication, 62, 932-949. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01681.x
41. Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile Internet use among teens and young adults. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Social-Media-and-Young-Adults.aspx
42. Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17, 337-353. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01576.x
43. Macafee, T., & De Simone, J. J. (2012). Killing the bill online?: Pathways to young people's protest engagement via social media. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(11), 1-6. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0153
44. Marwell, G., & Oliver, P. (1993). The critical mass in collective action: A micro-social theory. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
45. McAdam, D., & Paulsen, R. (1993). Specifying the relationship between social ties and activism. American Journal of Sociology, 99, 640-667. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2781286
46. McPherson, J. M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415-444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
47. Mutz, D. C. (2006). Hearing the other side: Deliberative versus participatory democracy. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
48. östman, J. (2012). Information, expression, participation: How involvement in user-generated content relates to democratic engagement among young people. New Media & Society, 14, 1004-1021. doi:10.1177/1461444812438212
49. Papacharissi, Z. (Ed.). (2010). A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites. New York, NY: Routledge.
50. Pearce, K. E., & Kendzior, S. (2012). Networked authoritarianism and social media in Azerbaijan. Journal of Communication, 62, 283-298. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01633.x
51. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York, NY: Free Press.
52. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41-50. doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41
53. Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1984). Reducing bias in observational studies using subclassification on the propensity score. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 79, 516-524. doi:10.1080/01621459.1984.10478078
54. Scherman, A., Arriagada, A., & Valenzuela, S. (in press). Student and environmental protests in Chile: The role of social media. Politics.
55. Scifleet, P., Henninger, M. & Albright, K. H. (2013). When social media are your source. Information Research,18(3), paper C41. Retrieved from http://InformationR.net/ir/18-3/colis/paperC41.html
56. Shah, D. V., Cho, J., Nah, S., Gotlieb, M. R., Hwang, H., Lee, N.-J., et al. (2007). Campaign ads, online messaging, and participation: Extending the communication mediation model. Journal of Communication, 57, 676-703. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2007.00363.x
57. Sinclair, B. (2012). The social citizen: Peer networks and political behavior. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
58. Smets, K., & van Ham, C. (2013). The embarrassment of riches? A meta-analysis of individual-level research on voter turnout. Electoral Studies, 32, 344-359. doi:10.1016/j.electstud.2012.12.006
59. Stuart, E. A. (2010). Matching methods for causal inference: A review and a look forward. Statistical Science, 25, 1-21. doi:10.1214/09-STS313
60. Tarrow, S. (1995). Cycles of collective action: Between moments of madness and the repertoire of contention. In M. Traugott (Ed.), Repertoires and cycles of collective action (pp. 89-115). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
61. Thoemmes, F. J. (2012). Propensity score matching in SPSS. Retrieved from http://sourceforge.net/p/psmspss/home/Home
62. Tufekci, Z., & Wilson, C. (2012). Social media and the decision to participate in political protest: Observations from Tahrir Square. Journal of Communication, 62, 363-379. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01629.x
63. Valenzuela, S. (2013). Unpacking the use of social media for protest behavior: The roles of information, opinion expression, and activism. American Behavioral Scientist, 57, 920-942. doi:10.1177/0002764213479375
64. Valenzuela, S., & Arriagada, A. (2011). Politics without citizens? Public opinion, television news, the president, and real-world factors in Chile, 2000-2005. International Journal of Press/Politics, 16, 357-381. doi:10.1177/1940161210379636
65. Valenzuela, S., Arriagada, A., & Scherman, A. (2012). The social media basis of youth protest behavior: The case of Chile. Journal of Communication, 62, 299-314. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01635.x
66. van de Donk, W., Loader, B. D., Nixon, P. G., & Rucht, D. (Eds.). (2004). Cyberprotest: New media, citizens and social movements. London, UK: Routledge.
67. Watts, D. J. (1999). Small worlds: The dynamics of networks between order and randomness. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
68. Wilson, C., & Dunn, A. (2011). The Arab Spring: Digital media in the Egyptian revolution: Descriptive analysis from the Tahrir data set. International Journal of Communication, 5, 1248-1272. Retrieved from http://ijoc.org/ojs/index.php/ijoc/article/view/1180/682
69. Wolfsfeld, G., Segev, E., & Sheafer, T. (2013). Social media and the Arab Spring: Politics comes first. International Journal of Press/Politics, 18, 115-137. doi:10.1177/1940161212471716