The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns
Open accessAbstract
Twitter has become one of the most important online spaces for political communication practice and research. Through a hand-coded content analysis, this study compares how British and Dutch Parliamentary candidates used Twitter during the 2010 general elections. We found that Dutch politicians were more likely to use Twitter than UK candidates and on average tweeted over twice as much as their British counterparts. Dutch candidates were also more likely to embrace the interactive potential of Twitter, and it appeared that the public responded to this by engaging in further dialogue. We attribute the more conservative approach of British candidates compared to the Netherlands to historic differences in the appropriation of social media by national elites, and differing levels of discipline imposed from the central party machines.
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
The Consequences of the Internet for Politics
Farrell, H. (2012) · Annual Review of Political Science · doi:10.1146/annurev-polisci-030810-110815 · Cited by 387 · cited 1×
“For well over a decade, research has been assessing the impact of these changes on politics and what it means for democracy (see, for example, Farrell, 2012).”
Cited by
Bossetta, M. (2018) · Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · doi:10.1177/1077699018763307 · Cited by 689
Metz, M., Kruikemeier, S., & Lecheler, S. (2020) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1581244 · Cited by 268
Guerrero-Solé, F. (2018) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/2056305118808776 · Cited by 75
Guerrero-Solé, F., & Lopez-Gonzalez, H. (2019) · Social Science Computer Review · doi:10.1177/0894439317744163 · Cited by 28
Garassino, D., Brocca, N., & Masia, V. (2022) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2022.03.024 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Graham, T., Jackson, D., & Broersma, M.
- Venue
- New Media & Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2014-08-12
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 765-783
- ISSN
- 1461-4448 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7315
- OpenAlex
- W2105159180
- Cited by
- 285
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 66.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/1461444814546728
- The paper
- Graham, T., Jackson, D., & Broersma, M. (2016). New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814546728
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.
