The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Web 2.0 and Politics: The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election and an E-Politics Research Agenda1
Abstract
The Internet was a major factor in the 2008 U.S. presidential campaign and has become an important tool for political communication and persuasion. Yet, information systems research is generally silent on the role of the Internet in politics. In this paper, we argue that IS is positioned to enhance understanding of the influence of the Internet on politics, and, more specifically, the process of election campaigning using Internet-based technologies such as Web 2.0. In this paper, we discuss how these technologies can change the nature of competition in politics and replace or complement traditional media. Our empirical study on how Web 2.0 technologies were used by the candidates leading up to the 2008 U.S. presidential primaries sheds light on how these technologies influenced candidate performance. Finally, we outline a research agenda highlighting where IS can contribute to the academic discourse on e-politics.
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
Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences
(1990) · Computers, Environment and Urban Systems · doi:10.1016/0198-9715(90)90050-4 · Cited by 65,269
Granovetter, M. S. (1973) · American Journal of Sociology · doi:10.1086/225469 · Cited by 40,491
Hsiao, C. (2014) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139839327 · Cited by 7,869
Hsiao, C. (2022) · doi:10.1017/9781009057745 · Cited by 7,869
The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews
Chevalier, J. A., & Mayzlin, D. (2006) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.43.3.345 · Cited by 6,003
4 What Is Web 2.0? Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software
O’Reilly, T. (2012) · The Social Media Reader · doi:10.18574/nyu/9780814764077.003.0008 · Cited by 5,601
Applied Linear Regression Models
(1997) · Technometrics · doi:10.1080/00401706.1997.10485142 · Cited by 4,615
Wasko, M. M., & Faraj, S. (2005) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.2307/25148667 · Cited by 3,904
Capturing the Complexity in Advanced Technology Use: Adaptive Structuration Theory
DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.5.2.121 · Cited by 3,879
Resnick, P., & Varian, H. R. (1997) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/245108.245121 · Cited by 3,772
Cited by
The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption
Hamari, J., Sjöklint, M., & Ukkonen, A. (2016) · Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.23552 · Cited by 3,439
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
The Needs–Affordances–Features Perspective for the Use of Social Media1
Karahanna, E., Xu, S. X., Xu, Y., & Zhang, N. (. (2018) · MIS Quarterly · doi:10.25300/misq/2018/11492 · Cited by 518
Theory building with big data-driven research–Moving away from the “What” towards the “Why”
Kar, A. K., & Dwivedi, Y. K. (2020) · International Journal of Information Management · doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102205 · Cited by 301
Investigating Political Polarization on Twitter: A Canadian Perspective
Gruzd, A., & Roy, J. (2014) · Policy & Internet · doi:10.1002/1944-2866.poi354 · Cited by 280
Metadata
- Authors
- Wattal, S., Schuff, D., Mandviwalla, M., & Williams, C. B.
- Venue
- MIS Quarterly
- Publisher
- MIS Quarterly
- Published
- 2010-12-01
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 669-688
- ISSN
- 0276-7783 (ISSN-L)
- 2162-9730
- OpenAlex
- W1598145799
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 62
- FWCI
- 69.98
- 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: Web 2.0 and Politics: The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election and an E-Politics Research Agenda1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/25750700
- The paper
- Wattal, S., Schuff, D., Mandviwalla, M., & Williams, C. B. (2010). Web 2.0 and Politics: The 2008 U.S. Presidential Election and an E-Politics Research Agenda1. MIS Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/25750700
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.
