The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign
Abstract
Among the many so-called microblogging services that allow their users to describe their current status in short posts, Twitter is probably among the most popular and well known. Since its launch in 2006, Twitter use has evolved and is increasingly used in a variety of contexts. This article utilizes emerging online tools and presents a rationale for data collection and analysis of Twitter users. The suggested approach is exemplified with a case study: Twitter use during the 2010 Swedish election. Although many of the initial hopes for e-democracy appear to have gone largely unfulfilled, the successful employment of the internet during the 2008 US presidential campaign has again raised voices claiming that the internet, and particularly social media applications like Twitter, provides interesting opportunities for online campaigning and deliberation. Besides providing an overarching analysis of how Twitter use was fashioned during the 2010 Swedish election campaign, this study identifies different user types based on how high-end users utilized the Twitter service. By suggesting a novel approach to the study of microblogging and by identifying user types, this study contributes to the burgeoning field of microblog research and gives specific insights into the practice of civic microblogging.
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
Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks
Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v3i1.13937 · Cited by 11,675
What is Twitter, a social network or a news media?
Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010) · Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1772690.1772751 · Cited by 6,652
Cited by
Emotions and Information Diffusion in Social Media—Sentiment of Microblogs and Sharing Behavior
Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222290408 · Cited by 1,604
Understanding Social Media Logic
Van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013) · Media and Communication · doi:10.17645/mac.v1i1.70 · Cited by 1,258
Enli, G. S., & Skogerbø, E. (2013) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2013.782330 · Cited by 709
Bossetta, M. (2018) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1077699018763307 · Cited by 689
More than words: Social networks’ text mining for consumer brand sentiments
Mostafa, M. M. (2013) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2013.01.019 · Cited by 623
Metadata
- Authors
- Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H.
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-11-21
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 729-747
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W2099016599
- Cited by
- 597
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 136.91
- 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: Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1461444811422894
- The paper
- Larsson, A. O., & Moe, H. (2012). Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811422894
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.