The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style
Abstract
This study explores how candidates running for the European Parliament (EP) in 2009 used micro-blogging and online social networks – in this case Twitter ( www.twitter.com ) in the early stage of its adoption – to communicate and connect with citizens. Micro-blogging in general, and Twitter in particular, is one of the new and popular Web 2.0 applications, yet there has been little research focusing on the use of Twitter by politicians. After reviewing different types of campaigning strategies and introducing a new and distinct strategy, this descriptive and exploratory study focuses on political candidates' use of micro-blogging and online social networking (i.e. Twitter) from a longitudinal, social network, and ideological perspective. The results clearly show that most candidates in 2009 still used Twitter reluctantly. Those who used Twitter did so predominantly for electoral campaigning and only sparingly for continuous campaigning. Candidates from progressive parties are the most active users of Twitter as a campaigning tool, whereas conservatives are virtually absent online. Although candidates' first degree networks are still relatively small and unconnected, their second degree networks are quite extensive. Candidates from parties in opposition have more extensive first degree networks than those from ruling parties. Candidates from fringe parties show small online networks.
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
Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x · Cited by 16,251
Cited by
Graham, T., Broersma, M., Hazelhoff, K., & van 't Haar, G. (2013) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2013.785581 · Cited by 363
Kreiss, D., Lawrence, R. G., & McGregor, S. C. (2018) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2017.1334727 · Cited by 294
Metz, M., Kruikemeier, S., & Lecheler, S. (2020) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1581244 · Cited by 268
Theocharis, Y., Barberá, P., Fazekas, Z., Popa, S. A., & Parnet, O. (2016) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12259 · Cited by 237
Algorithmic Amplification of Politics on Twitter
Huszár, F., Ktena, S. I., O’Brien, C., Belli, L., Schlaikjer, A., & Hardt, M. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2025334119 · Cited by 65
Metadata
- Authors
- Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S.
- Venue
- Party Politics
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-06-30
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 477-501
- ISSN
- 1354-0688 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-3683
- OpenAlex
- W2145593666
- Cited by
- 310
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 48.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1354068811407580
- The paper
- Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S. (2013). Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354068811407580
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.