The use of digital social networks from an analytical sociology perspective: The case of Spain

Rationality and Society

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 492-512

  Robles, José Manuel ^a   Torres Albero, Cristóbal ^b   Antino, Mirko ^a,c   De Marco, Stefano ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD COMPLUTENSE DE MADRID   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c INSTITUTO UNIVERSITÁRIO DE LISBOA ISCTE IUL   (Portugal)

Author keywords

Analytical sociology; digital political participation; digital social networks; social mechanisms

Indexed keywords

EID: 84946557452     PISSN: 10434631     EISSN: 14617358     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1043463115605480     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. M.AntinoJ.M.RoblesS.De Marco. (2013) Development and validation of the digital political participation inventory. In: XI Spanish congress of sociology, Madrid, 10–12July.
2. J.AusserhoferA.Maireder (2013) National politics on Twitter. Structures and topics of a networked public sphere. Information, Communication and Society16(3): 291–314.
3. L.Bennett (2003) Communicating global activism: strengths and vulnerabilities of networked politics. Information, Communication and Society6(2): 143–168.
4. L.BennettA.Segerberg (2011) Digital media and the personalization of collective action: social technology and the organization of protests against the global economic crisis. Information, Communication and Society14(6): 770–799.
5. B.Bimber (2001) Information and political engagement in America: the search for effects of information technology at the individual level. Political Research Quarterly54(1): 53–67.
6. H.Bonfadelli (2002) The Internet and knowledge gaps. A theoretical and empirical investigation. European Journal of Communication17: 65–84.
7. R.BorgeA.S.Cardenal (2011) Surfing the net: a pathway to participation for the politically uninterested?Policy & Internet3(1): 1–29.
8. R.Boudon (1998) Social Mechanisms without black boxes. In: P.HedströmR.Swedberg (eds) Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 172–203.
9. M.W.BrowneR.Cudeck (1993) Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In: K.A.BollenJ.S.Long (eds) Testing Structural Equation Models. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE, pp. 136–162.
10. A.Chadwick (2006) Internet Politics: States, Citizens, and New Communication Technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11. A.ChadwickP.N.Howard (2009) The Routledge Handbook of Internet and Politics. New York: Routledge.
12. J.S.Coleman (1986) Social theory, social research, and theory of action. American Journal of Sociology91: 1309–1335.
13. J.CooperK.Weaver (2003) Gender and Computers: Understanding Digital Divide. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. L.Dahlberg (2001) Democracy via cyberspace. New Media & Society3(2): 157–177.
15. D.Davidson (1980) Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
16. F.D.Davis (1986) A Technological Acceptance Model for Empirical Testing New End-User Information Systems: Theory and Results. Cambridge: MIT Sloan School of Management.
17. F.D.Davis (1989) Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly13: 19–34.
18. S.De MarcoJ.M.RoblesM.Antino (2014) Digital skills as a conditioning factor for digital political participation. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research39(1): 146–167.
19. I.B.DylkoM.A.BeamK.D.Landreville. (2012) Filtering 2008 US presidential election news on YouTube by elites and non elites: an examination of the democratizing potential of the Internet. New Media & Society14(5): 832–849.
20. J.Elster (2007) Explaining Social Behaviour: More Nuts and Bolts for the Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. R.K.GibsonW.LusoliS.Ward (2005) Online participation in the UK: testing a ‘contextualised’ model of Internet effects. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations7(4): 561–583.
22. J.H.Goldthorpe (2000) On Sociology: Numbers, Narratives, and the Integration of Research and Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. S.González-Bailón (2009) Opening the black box of link formation: social factors underlying the structure of the web. Social Networks31(4): 271–280.
24. E.Hargittai (2010) Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet skills and uses among members of the ‘net generation’. Sociological Inquiry80: 92–113.
25. P.Hedström (2006) Explaining the social change: an analytical approach. Papers: Revista de Sociología80: 73–95.
26. P.HedströmR.Swedberg (1998) Social Mechanisms: An Analytical Approach to Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. D.HoffmanT.P.NovakA.E.Scholosser (2001) The evolution of digital divide: examining the relationship of race to internet access and usage over time. In: B.M.Compaine (ed.) The Digital Divide: Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth?Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp. 47–99.
28. P.E.N.HowardL.RainieS.Jones (2001) Days and nights on the Internet. American Behavioral Scientist45: 383–404.
29. L.HuP.M.Bentler (1998) Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods3(4): 424–453.
30. A.O.LarssonH.Moe (2012) Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media & Society14(5): 729–747.
31. L.Lessing (2006) The Code Version 2.0. Cambridge: Basic Books.
32. P.Levy (1997) Cyberculture. Rapport au Conseil de l’Europedans le Cadre du Projet Nouvelles Technologies: Coopération Culturelle et Communication. Brussels: Editorial Du Conseil de l’Europa.
33. D.Lewis (1994) Reduction of mind. In: S.Guttenplan (ed.) A Companion to the Philosophy of Mind. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers, pp. 412–431.
34. W.LusoliS.WardR.K.Gibson (2006) (Re)connecting politics? Parliament, the public and the internet. Parliamentary Affairs59(1): 24–42.
35. A.Macintosh (2006) E-participating in policy-making: the research and the challenges. In: P.CunninghamM.Cunningham (eds) Exploiting the Knowledge Economy: Issues, Applications, Case Studies. Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 364–369.
36. M.MargolisD.Resnick (2000) Politics as Usual: The Cyberspace ‘Revolution’. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
37. K.Mathieson (1991) Predicting user intentions: comparing the technological acceptance model with the theory of planned behaviour. Information Systems Research2: 173–191.
38. P.Norris (2001) Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. A.PilnyM.Shumate (2012) Hyperlinks as extensions of offline instrumental collective action. Information, Communication and Society15(2): 260–286.
40. J.M.RoblesC.Torres (2012) Digital divide and the information and communication society in Spain. Sociologija i Prostor194(1): 291–307.
41. J.M.RoblesS.De MarcoM.Antino (2013) Activating activist. The links between political participation and digital political participation. Information, Communication and Society16(6): 856–877.
42. E.F.Stone-RomeroP.J.Rosopa (2008) The relative validity of inferences about mediation as a function of research design characteristics. Organizational Research Methods11(2): 326–352.
43. C.TorresJ.M.RoblesS.De Marco (2013) Inequalities in the information and knowledge society: from the digital divide to digital inequality. In: A.López Peláez (eds) The Robotic Divide: A New Frontier in the XXI Century?London: Springer, pp. 173–194.
44. A.J.Van DeursenJ.Van Dijk (2009) Using the Internet: skill related problems in users’ online behavior. Interacting with Computers21: 393–402.
45. J.Van Dijk (2000) Models of democracy and concepts of communication. In: K.L.HackerJ.Van Dijk (eds) Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory & Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 30–53.
46. J.Van Dijk (2005) The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. London: SAGE.
47. J.Van Dijk (2006) Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics34: 221–235.
48. J.Van LaerP.Van Aelst (2010) Internet and social movements action repertoires. Information, Communication and Society13(8): 1146–1171.
49. V.VenkateshM.G.MorrisDavis. (2003) User acceptance of information technology: toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly27: 425–478.
50. K.Vonderschmitt (2012) The growing use of social media in political campaigns: how to use Facebook, Twitter and YouTube to create an effective social media campaign. Honors College Capstone Experience/Thesis Projects paper 360. Available at: http://digitalcommons.wku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1366&context=stu_hon_theses
51. S.WardR.Gibson (2009) European political organizations and the Internet: mobilization, participation, and change. In: A.ChadwickP.N.Howard (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Internet and Politics. New York: Routledge, pp. 25–39.
52. C.B.WilliamsJ.Gulati (2013) Social networks in political campaigns: Facebook and the congressional elections of 2006 and 2008. New Media & Society15(1): 52–71.
53. L.Winner (1986) The Whale and the Reactor. Chicago, IL: The University Chicago Press.
54. D.WringI.Horrocks (2001) The transformation of political parties. In: B.AxfordR.Huggins (eds) New Media and Politics. London: SAGE, pp. 191–209.