German E-campaigning and the emergence of a ‘digital voter’? An analysis of the users of the wahl-o-mat

German Politics

Volumn 24, Issue 4, 2015, Pages 525-541

  Marschall, Stefan ^a   Schultze, Martin ^a  

^a HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84951131979     PISSN: 09644008     EISSN: 17438993     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/09644008.2014.949681     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Andrew J. Chadwick and Philip N. Howard (eds), Handbook of Internet Politics (London: Routledge, 2009);
2. Eva J. Schweitzer and Steffen Albrecht (eds), Das Internet im Wahlkampf: Analysen zur Bundestagswahl 2009 (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fu¨ r Sozialwissenschaften, 2011).
3. Pippa Norris, A Virtuous Circle: Political Communications in Postindustrial Societies (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).
4. David Farrell and Ru¨diger Schmitt-Beck (eds), Non-Party Actors in Electoral Politics: The Role of Interest Groups and Independent Citizens in Contemporary Election Campaigns (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 2008).
5. Stefan Marschall, ‘Wahlen, Wa¨hler, Wahl-O-Mat’, Aus Politik und Zeitgeschichte 4 (2011), p.41.
6. Pippa Norris, Digital Divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001). ‘Digital divide’ has also been used to label global disparities in terms of Internet infrastructure.
7. ARD/ZDF-Arbeitsgruppe Multimedia, ‘Nichtnutzer von Online: Einstellungen und Zugangsbarrieren. Ergebnisse der ARD/ZDF-Offline-Studie 1999’, Media Perspektiven 8 (1999), pp.415–22.
8. (N)onliner Atlas 2009, p.12, available from http://www.initiatived21.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/NONLINER2009.pdf.
9. ‘Digital natives’ is a label for persons who have grown up in the ‘digital era’, and who have been early socialised into the usage of online communication (vs ‘digital immigrants’);
10. Marc Prensky, ‘Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants’, On the Horizon 9/5 (2001), pp.1–6;
11. John Palfrey and Urs Grasser, Born Digital: The First Generation of Digital Natives (Philadelphia, PA: Basic Books, 2008);
12. Frank Ja¨ckel, ‘Was unterscheidet Mediengenerationen? Theoretische und methodische Herausforderungen der Medienentwicklung’, Media Perspektiven 5 (2010), pp.247–57.
13. Rachel K. Gibson, Lusoli Wainer and Stephen Ward, ‘Online Participation in the UK: Testing a “Contextualised” Model of Internet Effects’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations 7/4 (2005), pp.561–83.
14. Diana Owen, ‘The Internet and Youth Civic Engagement in the United States’, in S. Oates, D. Owen and R.K. Gibson (eds), The Internet and Politics: Citizens, Voters and Activists (New York: Routledge, 2006), pp.17–33;
15. Aaron Martin, Young People and Politics: Political Engagement in Anglo-American Democracies (New York: Routledge, 2012).
16. Andrew J. Chadwick, Internet Politics: States, Citizens and New Communication Technologies (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006).
17. Hyung Lae Park, Internet Effect, Political Participation and New Digital Divide: Internet Influence on Political Participation: Supplement or Revolution (Saarbru¨cken: LAP Lambert, 2010).
18. Dietram A. Scheufele and Matthew C. Nisbet, ‘Being a Citizen Online: New Opportunities and Dead Ends’, Press/Politics 7/3 (2002), pp.55–66.
19. Martin Emmer, Gerhard Vowe and Jens Wolling, Bu¨rger online: Die Entwicklung der politischen Online-Kommunikation in Deutschland (Konstanz: UVK, 2011).
20. Wolfgang Schweiger and Klaus Beck (eds), Handbuch Online-Kommunikation (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fu¨ r Sozialwissenschaften, 2010).
21. Jay G. Blumler and Elihu Katz, The Uses of Mass Communication (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1974);
22. Richard L. West and Lynn H. Turner, Uses and Gratifications Theory: Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application (Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill, 2010).
23. Klaus Beck, Kommunikationswissenschaft (Stuttgart: UTB, 2007), p.187f.
24. Werner Wirth and Wolfgang Schweiger (eds), Selektion im Internet: Empirische Analysen zu einem Schlu¨sselkonzept (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1999).
25. Thomas E. Ruggiero, ‘Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century’, Mass Communication and Society 3/1 (2009), pp.3–37.
26. Emmer et al., Bu¨rger online.
27. Katrin Busemann and Bernhard Engel, ‘Wandel der Mediennutzungsprofile im Zeitalter des Internet’, Media Perspektiven 3 (2012), pp.133–46.
28. Diego Garzia, ‘The Effects of VAAs on Users’ Voting Behaviour: An Overview’, in Lorella Cedroni and Diego Garzia (eds), Voting Advice Applications in Europe: The State of the Art (Napoli: Scriptaweb, 2010), p.19.
29. Marc Hooghe and Wouter Teepe, ‘Party Profiles on the Web: An Analysis of the Logfiles of Non-Partisan Interactive Political Internet Sites in the 2003 and 2004 Election Campaigns in Belgium’, New Media Society 9/6 (2007), pp.965–85;
30. Matthew Wall, Maria-Laura Sudulich, Rory Costello and Enricque Leon, ‘Picking Your Party Online: An Investigation of Ireland’s First Online Voting Advice Application’, Information Polity 14 (2009), pp.203–18;
31. Andreas Ladner and Joe¨lle Pianzola, ‘Do Voting Advice Applications Have an Effect on Electoral Participation and Voter Turnout? Evidence from the 2007 Swiss Federal Elections’, in Efthimios Tambouris, Anne Macintosh and Olivier Glassey (eds), Electronic Participation (Berlin: Springer, 2010), pp.211–24;
32. Stefan Marschall and Christian K. Schmidt, ‘The Impact of Voting Indicators: The Case of the German Wahl-O-Mat’, in Cedroni and Garzia (eds), Voting Advice Applications in Europe, pp.65–104.
33. Stefan Marschall, ‘Nutzer und Nutzen – der Wahl-O-Mat zur Bundestagswahl 2009’, in Eva J. Schweitzer and Steffen Albrecht (eds), Das Internet im Wahlkampf, pp.136–53.
34. Kristjan Vassil, ‘Role of Self Selection in Estimating the Effects of Voting Advice Applications: Empirical Evidence on the Basis of Swiss Smartvote Data’, Paper Presented at the ‘6th ECPR General Conference’, 25–27 Aug. 2011, Reykjavik, Iceland. The report is available from http://www.initiatived21.de/wp-content/uploads/alt/08_NOA/NONLINER2008.pdf
35. Christof Wolf and Henning Best (eds), Handbuch der sozialwissenschaftlichen Datenanalyse (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag fu¨r Sozialwissenschaften, 2010);
36. Scott W. Menard, Applied Logistic Regression (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002);
37. Subhash Sharma, Applied Multivariate Techniques (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1996), pp.328–32.
38. Table 3 shows the odds ratios and standard errors. Odds ratios will be interpreted in our model as follows: values between 0 and 1 indicate that the probability of using the Wahl-O-Mat is smaller compared to the reference category. Values higher than 1 imply that the probability of using the tool is higher compared to the reference category. As an overall goodness-of-fit measure we calculate Nagelkerke-Pseudo-R2.