Social media use and support for populist radical right parties: assessing exposure and selection effects in a two-wave panel study
Abstract
Vote shares for populist radical right parties (PRRPs) have increased considerably in recent years, and this advancement of PRRPs has been attributed in part to social media. We assess the affinity between social media and populist radical right parties by examining a) whether more frequent social media use for news enhances the willingness to vote for a PRRP (exposure effect) as well as b) whether individuals who have voted for a PRRP in the past use social media more frequently to access news (selection effect). To address these research questions, we analysed data of a two-wave survey study that was conducted in Germany, focusing on the party Alternative for Germany (AfD). Binary logistic regression highlighted that social media use increased the likelihood of supporting the AfD. Pre-registered multinominal analyses, however, showed that this effect was driven by specific party comparisons. That is, using the AfD as a reference category, social media use reduced intentions to vote for parties that expressed similar positions as the AfD on the issue of immigration and with which the PRRP competes over votes. Social media selection effects were not supported.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Digital platforms were observed to benefit populist parties more than they benefit established politicians.
“For example, digital platforms were observed to benefit populist parties more than they benefit established politicians131–134.”
From A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy (2022) · cites this paper as [133]
Cites
Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x · Cited by 1,940 · see citing works
Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis
Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444817724170 · Cited by 738 · see citing works
Political News in the News Feed: Learning Politics from Social Media
Bode, L. (2016) · Mass Communication and Society · doi:10.1080/15205436.2015.1045149 · Cited by 545 · see citing works
Schemer, C. (2012) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01672.x · Cited by 281 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A systematic review of worldwide causal and correlational evidence on digital media and democracy
Lorenz-Spreen, P., Oswald, L., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2022) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-022-01460-1 · Cited by 348 · see citing works
- Authors
- Schumann, S., Boer, D., Hanke, K., & Liu, J.
- Affiliations
- University College London (GB)
- Universität Koblenz (DE)
- GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences (DE)
- Massey University (NZ)
- Corresponding author
- Schumann, Sandy
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2019-10-05
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 921-940
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W2977735717
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 4
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4
- FWCI
- 16.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Information Communication & Society (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Massey University in New Zealand
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Populism, Right-Wing Movements
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Keywords
- social media use, populist radical right parties, Alternative für Deutschland, vote choice, exposure effects, selection effects, news consumption, immigration attitudes, party competition
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