Cited by 123Social Media and PoliticsMedia Studies and CommunicationMedia and Digital Communication

Communication dynamics in twitter during political campaigns: The case of the 2011 Spanish national election

Aragón, Pablo, Kappler, Karolin Eva, Kaltenbrunner, Andreas, Laniado, David, Volkovich, Yana·2013·Policy & Internet

Abstract

The irruption of social media in the political sphere is generating repositories of “Big Data,” which can be mined to gain insights into communication dynamics. The research reported here relies on a large data set from Twitter to examine the activity, emotional content, and interactions of political parties and politicians during the campaign for the Spanish national elections in November 2011. The aim of this study is to investigate the adaptation of political parties to this new communication and organizational paradigm originating in the evolution of the Internet and online social networks. We analyze the reply and retweet networks of seven political parties with significant offline differences to assess their conversation and information diffusion patterns. We observe that political parties, and especially the major traditional parties, still tend to use Twitter just as a one‐way flow communication tool. Moreover, we find evidence of a balkanization trend in the Spanish online political sphere, as observed in previous research for other countries.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/1944-2866.poi327

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Other studies also used content analysis for the same purpose.

    “Otros estudios (Baquerizo-Neira, Luzuriaga-Uribe & Rovayo-Gonzalez, 2020; Aragón et al., 2013;Graham et al., 2013;Bruns & Highfield, 2013) también utilizaron esta herramienta para el mismo fin.”
  • Previous studies reveal that homophily of the aggregate network measured using retweeting and mentioning tend to be the same, although mentioning is more volatile at the group levels.

    “Previous studies (Lietz et al., 2014;Aragón et al., 2013) reveal that homophily of the aggregate network measured using retweeting and mentioning tend to be same, although mentioning is more volatile at the group (sub network with a particular ideology) levels.”

    From Credibility of climate change denial in social media (2019) · cites this paper as Aragón et al., 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Aragón, P., Kappler, K. E., Kaltenbrunner, A., Laniado, D., & Volkovich, Y.
Venue
Policy & Internet
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2013-06
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
183-206
ISSN
1944-2866 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2152199665
Cited by
123
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4
FWCI
29.64
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Policy & Internet (publishedVersion)
  • O2 - Repositori Institucional (Universitat Oberta de Catalunya) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media Studies and Communication
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
Twitter, political campaigns, 2011 Spanish general election, political parties, politicians, retweet networks, information dissemination, emotional content, one-way communication, Balkanization, online political communication, social media adaptation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review