research-article

Hybrid media consumption: how tweeting during a televised political debate influences the vote decision

Authors:

Misa T. Maruyama,

Scott P. Robertson,

Sara K. Douglas,

Bryan C. Semaan,

Heather A. FaucettAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '14: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing

Pages 1422 - 1432

https://doi.org/10.1145/2531602.2531719

Published: 15 February 2014 Publication History

Abstract

An increasing number of people are using microblogs to broadcast their thoughts in real time as they watch televised political events. Microblogging social network sites (SNSs) such as Twitter generate a parallel stream of information and opinion. It is presumed that the additional content enhances the viewing experience, but our experiment explores the validity of this assumption. We studied how tweeting, or passively observing Twitter during a debate, influenced affect, recall and vote decision. For most measures, participants' average feeling and recall toward the candidates did not depend on Twitter activity, but Twitter activity did matter for vote choice. People who actively tweeted changed their voting choice to reflect the majority sentiment on Twitter. Results are discussed in terms of the possibility that active tweeting leads to greater engagement but that it may also make people more susceptible to social influence.

References

[1]

Adamic, L., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. Proc. of the International Workshop on Link Discovery.

Digital Library

[2]

Anger, I., & Kittl, C. (2011). Measuring influence on Twitter. In I-KNOW, 31.

Digital Library

[3]

Asch, S.E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9).

[4]

Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, K. (2010). Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. Proc. of the Int'l AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.

[5]

Cialdini, R.B., & Goldstein, N.J., (2004). Social Influence: Compliance and Conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591--621.

[6]

David, B., & Turner, J. C. (2001). Majority and minority influence: A single process self-categorization analysis. In C. De Dreu; N. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 91--121). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

[7]

Diakopoulos, N. A., & Shamma, D. A. (2010). Characterizing Debate Performance via Aggregated Twitter Sentiment. Proc. of CHI '10. New York, NY:ACM.

Digital Library

[8]

Eveland, W. P. (2004). The effect of political discussion in producing informed citizens: The roles of information, motivation, and elaboration. Political Communication, 21(2), 177--193.

[9]

Farrell, H., & Drezner, D.W. (2008). The power and politics of blogs. Public Choice, 134, 15- 30.

[10]

Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.

[11]

Huberman, B., Romero, D. M., and Wu, F. (2009). Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday, 14. 1--5. http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/231 7/2063

[12]

Hyman, I.E. (1994). Conversational remembering: Story recall with a peer versus for an experimenter. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 8, 49--66.

[13]

Kivran-Swaine, F., & Naaman, M. (2011). Network properties and social sharing of emotions in social awareness streams. Proc. of the conference on Computer supported cooperative work, 379--382. ACM.

Digital Library

[14]

Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steinfield, C. (2006). A face (book) in the crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing. Proc. of the conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.

Digital Library

[15]

Marcus, G.E., W.R. Neuman, & M. MacKuen. (2000) Affective Intelligence and Political Judgment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

[16]

Marwick, A., & boyd, d. (2011). I Tweet Honestly, I Tweet Passionately: Twitter Users, Context Collapse, and the Imagined Audience. New Media & Society, 120.

[17]

Mascaro, C., & Goggins, S.P. (2012). Twitter as Virtual Town Square: Citizen Engagement During a Nationally Televised Republican Primary Debate. APSA 2012 Annual Meeting Paper.

[18]

Milliken, M., & O'Donnell, S. (2008). User-generated online video: The next public sphere IEEE Int'l Symposium on Technology and Society, 1--3.

[19]

Milliken, M., Gibson, K., & O'Donnell, S. (2008). Usergenerated video and the online public sphere: Will YouTube facilitate digital freedom of expression in Atlantic Canada American Communication Journal, 10, 3.

[20]

Mondak, J.J., & Huckfeldt, R. (2006). The accessibility and utility of candidate character in electoral decision making. Electoral Studies, 25(1), 20--34.

[21]

Naaman, M., Boase, J., & Lai, C. H. (2010). Is it really about me?: message content in social awareness streams. Proc. of the conference on Computer supported cooperative work.

Digital Library

[22]

Nickerson, R. S.(1998) Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175--220.

[23]

Poor, N. (2005). Mechanisms of an online public sphere: The website Slashdot. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10, 2.

[24]

Raine, L., & Smith, A. (2012). Politics on social networking sites. Pew Internet and American Life Project.

[25]

Robertson, S.P., Douglas, S., Maruyama, M., & Chen, L. (2012). Political dialog evolution in a social network, In Proc. of the 14th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference. New York: ACM, 40--48.

Digital Library

[26]

Robertson, S.P., Douglas, S., Maruyama, M., & Semaan, B. (2013). Political discourse on social networking sites: Sentiment, in-group/out-group orientation and rationality. Information Polity 18(2), 107--126.

Digital Library

[27]

Robertson, S.P., Vatrapu, R.K., & Medina, R. (2009). The social life of social networks: Facebook linkage patterns in the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Proceedings of the 10th Annual International Digital Government Research Conference. New York: ACM, 615.

Digital Library

[28]

Romero, D.M., Galuba, W., Asur, S., and Huberman, B.A. (2011). Influence and Passivity in Social Media. Proc. of the European Conference on Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases.

Digital Library

[29]

Romero, D.M., Meeder, B., and Kleinberg, J. (2011). Differences in the Mechanics of Information Diffusion Across Topics: Idioms, Political Hashtags, and Complex Contagion on Twitter. Proc. of the International World Wide Web Conference.

Digital Library

[30]

Ruggiero, T. (2000) Uses and Gratifications Theory in the 21st Century. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1), 3--37.

[31]

Scheufele, D. A. (2002). Examining differential gains from mass media and their implications for participatory behavior. Communication Research, 29(1), 46--65.

[32]

Shamma, D. A., Kennedy, L., & Churchill, E. (2010a). Tweetgeist: Can the twitter timeline reveal the structure of broadcast events. CSCW Horizons.

[33]

Shamma, D. A., Kennedy, L., & Churchill, E. F. (2009). Tweet the debates: understanding community annotation of uncollected sources. Proc. of the SIGMM Workshop on Social Media.

Digital Library

[34]

Shamma, D. A., Kennedy, L., & Churchill, E. F. (2010b). Conversational Shadows: Describing Live Media Events Using Short Messages. Proc. of ICWSM.

[35]

Smith, A., & Boyles, J. (2012). The rise of the "connected viewer." Pew Internet and American Life Project.

[36]

Stangor, C. (2004). Social groups in action and interaction. Psychology Press.

[37]

Strauss, A. L. & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. California: Sage.

[38]

Tremayne, M. (2006). Blogging, citizenship, and the future of media. Routledge, New York.

Digital Library

[39]

Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T., Sandner, P., & Welpe, I. (2010) Predicting Elections with Twitter: What 140 Characters Reveal about Political Sentiment. Proc. of International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 178--185.

[40]

Vatrapu, R., S.P. Robertson, and W. Dissanayake. (2008). Are Political Weblogs Public Spheres or Partisan Spheres' International Reports on SocioInformatics, 5(1), 7--26.

[41]

Weisberg, H.F., and J.G. Rusk. (1970). Dimensions of Candidate Evaluation. American Political Science Review, 64, 1167--1185.

[42]

Zhu, H., Huberman, B.A., Luon, Y. (2012). To switch or not to switch: Understanding influence in online choices. Proc. of CHI 2012, 2257--2266.

Digital Library

Cited By

Jia CLam MMai MHancock JBernstein M(2024)Embedding Democratic Values into Social Media AIs via Societal Objective FunctionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36410028:CSCW1(1-36)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641002
Alknjr H(2023)Do Social Media Users Change Their Beliefs to Reflect those Espoused by Other Users?Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval10.1145/3576840.3578300(467-470)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3576840.3578300
Halbach PBurbach LZiefle MCalero Valdez A(2023)News Articles on Social Media: Showing Balanced Content Adds More Credibility Than Trust Badges or User RatingsDigital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management10.1007/978-3-031-35748-0_31(439-460)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35748-0_31
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Hybrid media consumption: how tweeting during a televised political debate influences the vote decision
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing and business

Recommendations

Politics and young adults: the effects of Facebook on candidate evaluation
dg.o '14: Proceedings of the 15th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research

An increasing number of people are turning to social media to find political information and discuss politics, including the technologically savvy Millennial generation. Our study looks at how young voters use social media to evaluate political ...
She gets a sports car from our donation: rumor transmission in a Chinese microblogging community
CSCW '13: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Computer supported cooperative work

In this paper we report on a case study of rumor transmission during a nationwide scandal via China's most popular microblogging service, weibo.com. Specifically, we explore dynamics of the rumor discourse by characterizing different statement types and ...
Analyzing online opinions and influence campaigns on blogs using BlogTracker
ASONAM '21: Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining

Blogging has become an essential part of the new print media of the 21st century despite the emergence of social media platforms like Twitter and Facebook, with many news agencies, media outlets, journalists and users using this medium to write without ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CSCW '14: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing

February 2014

1600 pages

ISBN:9781450325400

DOI:10.1145/2531602

General Chairs:
Susan Fussell
Cornell University
,
Wayne Lutters
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
,
Program Chairs:
Meredith Ringel Morris
Microsoft Research
,
Madhu Reddy
Penn State University

Copyright © 2014 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 15 February 2014

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

CSCW'14

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW'14: Computer Supported Cooperative Work

February 15 - 19, 2014

Maryland, Baltimore, USA

Acceptance Rates

CSCW '14 Paper Acceptance Rate 134 of 497 submissions, 27%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 18 - 22, 2025

Bergen , Norway

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

31
Total Citations
View Citations
534
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)45
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5

Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Jia CLam MMai MHancock JBernstein M(2024)Embedding Democratic Values into Social Media AIs via Societal Objective FunctionsProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36410028:CSCW1(1-36)Online publication date: 26-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3641002
Alknjr H(2023)Do Social Media Users Change Their Beliefs to Reflect those Espoused by Other Users?Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval10.1145/3576840.3578300(467-470)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3576840.3578300
Halbach PBurbach LZiefle MCalero Valdez A(2023)News Articles on Social Media: Showing Balanced Content Adds More Credibility Than Trust Badges or User RatingsDigital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management10.1007/978-3-031-35748-0_31(439-460)Online publication date: 9-Jul-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-35748-0_31
Stiles ESwearingen CSeiter L(2022)Life of the Party: Social Networks, Public Attention, and the Importance of Shocks in the Presidential Nomination ProcessSocial Science Computer Review10.1177/0894439322107459941:4(1405-1419)Online publication date: 2-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393221074599
Ferwerda BBauer C(2022)To Flip or Not to Flip: Conformity Effect Across CulturesExtended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491101.3519662(1-7)Online publication date: 27-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491101.3519662
Caetano JGuimarães SAraújo MSilva MReis JSilva ABenevenuto FAlmeida J(2022)Characterizing Early Electoral Advertisements on Twitter: A Brazilian Case StudySocial Informatics10.1007/978-3-031-19097-1_16(257-272)Online publication date: 12-Oct-2022
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-19097-1_16
Wijenayake SHu JKostakos VGoncalves J(2021)Quantifying the Effects of Age-Related Stereotypes on Online Social ConformityHuman-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 202110.1007/978-3-030-85610-6_26(451-475)Online publication date: 26-Aug-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85610-6_26
Kanihan SMeirick PSegijn C(2020)Thinking, Knowing, or Thinking You Know: The Relationship Between Multiscreening and Political LearningJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly10.1177/107769902096006698:4(1104-1128)Online publication date: 28-Sep-2020
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020960066
Panda AGonawela AAcharyya SMishra DMohapatra MChandrasekaran RPal J(2020)NivaDuck - A Scalable Pipeline to Build a Database of Political Twitter Handles for India and the United StatesInternational Conference on Social Media and Society10.1145/3400806.3400830(200-209)Online publication date: 22-Jul-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3400806.3400830
Silva MSantos de Oliveira LAndreou AVaz de Melo PGoga OBenevenuto F(2020)Facebook Ads Monitor: An Independent Auditing System for Political Ads on FacebookProceedings of The Web Conference 202010.1145/3366423.3380109(224-234)Online publication date: 20-Apr-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3366423.3380109
Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents