The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Microblogging, Constituency Service and Impression Management: UK MPs and the Use of Twitter
Open accessAbstract
Twitter, a microblogging site which allows users to deliver statements, thoughts and links in 140 characters to followers as well as a wider Internet audience, is the latest online communications technology adopted by MPs. Assessing the use by early adopters, this article considers which MPs are most likely to use Twitter (for example, tweeting), and how. Content analysis of MPs' Twitter feeds was conducted, and personal and political characteristics identified which may influence use. The data suggested that of the six characteristics tested, gender, party and seniority had most impact on adoption. Applying Jones and Pittman's 1982 typology, there is clear evidence that MPs use Twitter as a tool of impression management. Constituency service is a secondary function of the use of Twitter by MPs. Where MPs use Twitter as part of their constituency role it is to promote their local activity. This article notes that a small group of MPs use Twitter as a regular communication channel, but most are only occasionally dipping their toe into the microbloggersphere.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Impression management: A literature review and two-component model.
Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.107.1.34 · Cited by 3,334
Cited by
Bossetta, M. (2018) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1077699018763307 · Cited by 689
Graham, T., Broersma, M., Hazelhoff, K., & van 't Haar, G. (2013) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2013.785581 · Cited by 363
The role of administrative data in the big data revolution in social science research
Connelly, R., Playford, C. J., Gayle, V., & Dibben, C. (2016) · Social Science Research · doi:10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.04.015 · Cited by 330
Automating the News: How Personalized News Recommender System Design Choices Impact News Reception
Beam, M. A. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650213497979 · Cited by 159
Banalities Turned Viral: Narendra Modi and the Political Tweet
Pal, J. (2015) · Television & New Media · doi:10.1177/1527476415573956 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Jackson, N., & Lilleker, D.
- Venue
- The Journal of Legislative Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 86-105
- ISSN
- 1357-2334 (ISSN-L)
- 1743-9337
- OpenAlex
- W1995637311
- Cited by
- 338
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 45.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Microblogging, Constituency Service and Impression Management: UK MPs and the Use of Twitter. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/13572334.2011.545181
- The paper
- Jackson, N., & Lilleker, D. (2011). Microblogging, Constituency Service and Impression Management: UK MPs and the Use of Twitter. The Journal of Legislative Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/13572334.2011.545181
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.