Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 315

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Meta-Analysis of State-of-the-Art Electoral Prediction From Twitter Data

Open access
Gayo-Avello, Daniel·2013·Social Science Computer Review

Abstract

Electoral prediction from Twitter data is an appealing research topic. It seems relatively straightforward and the prevailing view is overly optimistic. This is problematic because while simple approaches are assumed to be good enough, core problems are not addressed. Thus, this article aims to (1) provide a balanced and critical review of the state of the art; (2) cast light on the presume predictive power of Twitter data; and (3) propose some considerations to push forward the field. Hence, a scheme to characterize Twitter prediction methods is proposed. It covers every aspect from data collection to performance evaluation, through data processing and vote inference. Using that scheme, prior research is analyzed and organized to explain the main approaches taken up to date but also their weaknesses. This is the first meta-analysis of the whole body of research regarding electoral prediction from Twitter data. It reveals that its presumed predictive power regarding electoral prediction has been somewhat exaggerated: Social media may provide a glimpse on electoral outcomes but, up to now, research has not provided strong evidence to support it can currently replace traditional polls. Nevertheless, there are some reasons for optimism and, hence, further work on this topic is required, along with tighter integration with traditional electoral forecasting research.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0894439313493979

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 4 references

Research works printed but not linked: 50

  1. Barberá P., 2012, A new measure of party identification in Twitter. Evidence from Spain
  2. Bermingham A., 2011, On using Twitter to monitor political sentiment and predict election results
  3. Boutet A., 2012, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM)
  4. Campbell , J., 2000, Before the vote: Forecasting American national elections
  5. Campbell J. E., 2004, Political Science & Politics, 37, 733, 10.1017/S1049096504045020 · doi:10.1017/s1049096504045020
  6. 10.1145/1963405.1963500 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Ceron A., Curini L., Iacus S. M., Porro G. (2013). Every tweet counts? How sentiment analysis of social media can improve our knowledge of citizens’ political preferences with an application to Italy and France. New Media & Society,published online before print April 4, 2013. Retrieved May 15, 2013, from http://nms.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/04/02/1461444813480466.abstract
  8. Choi H., Varian H. (2009a, April 10). Predicting the present with Google trends (Technical report). Google Inc., Retrieved June 14, 2012, from http://google.com/googleblogs/pdfs/google_predicting_the_present.pdf · DOI · Paper page
  9. 10.1109/PASSAT/SocialCom.2011.34 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Conover M. D., 2011, Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
  11. Fanelli D. (2010). Do pressures to publish increase scientists’ bias? An empirical support from US states data. PLoS ONE, 5. doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0010271. Retrieved June 14, 2012, from http://www.plosone.org/article/info · DOI · Paper page
  12. Feller A., 2011, Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
  13. 10.1145/2001269.2001297 · DOI
  14. 10.1038/nature07634 · DOI · Paper page
  15. Golbeck J., 2011, Computing political preference among twitter followers
  16. 10.1145/1081870.1081883 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Hecht B., 2011, Tweets from Justin Bieber’s heart: The dynamics of the ‘location’ field in user profiles, 10.1145/1978942.1978976 · DOI · Paper page
  18. 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2009.00428.x · DOI · Paper page
  19. Jungherr A., Jürgens P., Schoen H. (2011). Why the pirate party won the German election of 2009 or the trouble with predictions: A response to Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sander, P. G. & Welpe, I. M. “Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment”, Social Science Computer Review, published online before print April 25, 2011. Retrieved June 14, 2012, from http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/early/2011/04/05/0894439311404119.abstract
  20. Lampos V., 2010, Tracking the flu pandemic by monitoring the social web, 10.1109/CIP.2010.5604088 · DOI · Paper page
  21. Lampos V., 2013, Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics
  22. 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2005.00178.x · doi:10.1111/j.1467-856x.2005.00178.x
  23. Lewis-Beck M. S., 1992, Forecasting elections
  24. 10.1007/978-3-031-02145-9 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Livne A., 2011, The party is over here: Structure and content in the 2010 election
  26. Mahmud J., 2012, Proceedings of the Sixth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
  27. 10.1145/2433396.2433463 · DOI
  28. 10.1109/PASSAT/SocialCom.2011.98 · DOI · Paper page
  29. Ming Fai Wong F., Sen S., Chiang M. (2012, March 21). Why watching movie Tweets won’t tell the whole story? arXiv preprint, Princeton University. Retrieved June 14, 2012, from http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4642 · DOI
  30. Mishne G., 2006, Capturing global mood levels using blog posts
  31. Mishne G., 2006, Predicting movie sales from blogger sentiment
  32. Mislove A., 2011, Understanding the demographics of Twitter users
  33. 10.1145/2145204.2145274 · DOI · Paper page
  34. Morstatter F., 2013, Proceedings the Seventh International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
  35. 10.1109/PASSAT/SocialCom.2011.188 · DOI
  36. Mustafaraj E., 2010, From obscurity to prominence in minutes: Political speech and real-time search
  37. O’Connor B., 2010, From Tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series
  38. O’Connor B., 2011, Proceedings of Second Workshop on Computational Social Science and the Wisdom of Crowds
  39. 10.1561/1500000011 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Pennacchiotti M., 2011, Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media
  41. Ratkiewicz J., 2011, Detecting and tracking political abuse in social media
  42. 10.1016/j.datak.2012.02.005 · DOI · Paper page
  43. Shi L., 2012, Proceedings of the workshop social network and social media analysis: Methods, models and applications
  44. 10.1109/HICSS.2012.607 · DOI
  45. Tjong Kim Sang E., 2012, Predicting the 2011 Dutch Senate election results with Twitter
  46. Tumasjan A., 2010, Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment
  47. Tumasjan A., Sprenger T. O., Sandner P. G., Welpe I. M. (2011). Where there is a sea there are Pirates: Response to Jungherr, Jürgens, and Schoen. Social Science Computer Review, published online before print May 18, 2011. Retrieved June 14, 2012, from http://ssc.sagepub.com/content/30/2/235.abstract · DOI
  48. 10.1109/SARNOF.2012.6222761 · DOI
  49. 10.3115/1220575.1220619 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Wong F. M. F., 2013, Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM)

Cited by

See all 315

Metadata

Authors
Gayo-Avello, D.
Venue
Social Science Computer Review
Published
2013-08-23
Volume
31
Issue
6
Pages
649-679
ISSN
  • 0894-4393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-8286
OpenAlex
W2136645636
Cited by
315
References
4
FWCI
50.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

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: A Meta-Analysis of State-of-the-Art Electoral Prediction From Twitter Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0894439313493979
The paper
Gayo-Avello, D. (2013). A Meta-Analysis of State-of-the-Art Electoral Prediction From Twitter Data. Social Science Computer Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439313493979

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.