The Future of Political Communication Research: Online Panels and Experimentation
Abstract
This chapter discusses the benefits of experimentation and looks at the future of political communication research, emphasizing the previous experimental work, as well as the creative manipulations, that have been conducted using online panels. It then studies two online election studies from 2008 in order to show the properties of the data and the samples, and, finally, reveals that Internet technology is currently redefining the methodology of political communication research and improving some of the basic weaknesses of the previous methods.
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?
The surveys use YouGov's standard procedure of drawing a sample matched to voting-age population on key demographic characteristics.
“These surveys use the firm's standard procedure of drawing a sample from its panel that is matched to the voting-age population on key demographic characteristics (e.g., Vavreck and Iyengar, 2011).”
From Partisan Gaps in Political Information and Information-Seeking Behavior: Motivated Reasoning or Cheerleading? (2019) · cites this paper as Vavreck and Iyengar, 2011
Cites
Mere Exposure: A Gateway to the Subliminal
Zajonc, R. B. (2001) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00154 · Cited by 1,299 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
How the news media activate public expression and influence national agendas
King, G., Schneer, B., & White, A. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao1100 · Cited by 333 · see citing works
Peterson, E., & Iyengar, S. (2019) · doi:10.31235/osf.io/pmn7h · Cited by 241 · see citing works
Self-citationInfluencing Myself: Self-Reinforcement Through Online Political Expression
Cho, J., Ahmed, S., Keum, H., Choi, Y. J., & Lee, J. H. (2018) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650216644020 · Cited by 116 · see citing works
- Authors
- Vavreck, L., & Iyengar, S.
- Affiliations
- University of California, Los Angeles (US)
- Stanford University (US)
- Venue
- The Oxford Handbook of American Public Opinion and the Media
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Published
- 2011-09-02
- Pages
- 156-168
- OpenAlex
- W262796551
- Cited by
- 26
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2020: 2 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.97
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oxford University Press eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Survey Methodology and Nonresponse
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Keywords
- political communication research, experimental study, online panels, 2008 elections, internet technologies, research methodology, survey sampling
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
