‘Show me the money and the party!’ – variation in Facebook and Twitter adoption by politicians

Figures & data

Table 1. Average marginal effects based on bivariate probit models examining motivations for adoption of Facebook & Twitter by candidates in the 2013 German Federal elections.

Dependent variable: Candidate adoption of Facebook or Twitter
	Facebook		Twitter
	AME	SE	AME	SE
Budget (Reference: 0–1k Euro)
1–5k Euro	0.122**	0.040	0.069^+	0.037
5–15k Euro	0.217***	0.048	0.105*	0.044
>15k Euro	0.296***	0.050	0.172***	0.047
Personality: Extraversion	0.003	0.057	0.025	0.056
Personality: Openness	0.060	0.069	0.143*	0.067
Attitudes: Pro-welfare state	0.088	0.082	0.057	0.082
Attitudes: Contra-Immigration	0.095	0.070	−0.049	0.070
Party (Reference: CDU/CSU)
SPD	0.099	0.062	−0.051	0.069
FDP	−0.041	0.061	0.011	0.067
GREEN party	−0.084	0.069	0.110	0.076
LEFT party	−0.128	0.081	−0.080	0.081
PIRATES	−0.252***	0.073	0.369***	0.075
AfD	−0.190**	0.067	−0.135*	0.064
Place of residence (Reference: Rural area)
Small or medium-sized city	0.005	0.035	0.029	0.034
Suburban area	−0.001	0.055	0.059	0.055
Big city	0.055	0.039	0.084*	0.038
Female	0.069*	0.033	−0.041	0.032
Age (in decades)	−0.061***	0.012	−0.077***	0.012
Incumbent	0.098	0.063	0.168***	0.048
Campaign: Interviews/press releases	0.059	0.055	0.095^+	0.056
Campaign: Campaign stand	0.053	0.065	0.051	0.066
Campaign: Blog/Youtube	0.284***	0.055	0.213***	0.050
N	927		927

Note: AME = Average marginal effect, SE = standard error.

Source of data: Kaczmirek et al. (2014); Rattinger et al., (2014).

⁺p < .10, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001.

Figure 1. Average predicted effects of resources on Facebook and Twitter adoption by candidates in the 2013 German Federal Elections. Source of data: Kaczmirek et al. (2014); Rattinger et al. (2014).

Figure 2. Use of Facebook and Twitter by candidates in the 2013 German Federal Elections (%). Source of data: Kaczmirek et al. (2014); Rattinger et al. (2014). Note: Data above may sum to 100+ because of rounding.

Figure 3. Perceived importance of campaign tools by candidates in the 2013 German Federal Elections (%). Source of data: Rattinger et al. (2014).

Figure 4. Average predicted effects of party on Facebook and Twitter adoption by candidates in the 2013 German Federal Elections. Source of data: Kaczmirek et al. (2014); Rattinger et al. (2014).

Table A1. Descriptive statistics for variables included in models examining the motivations for adoption of Facebook and Twitter by candidates in the 2013 German Federal elections.

Dependent variables
Facebook use	1130	0.64	0.48	0	1
Twitter use	1130	0.39	0.49	0	1
Independent variables
Female	1130	0.29	0.45	0	1
Age (in decades)	1130	4.59	1.20	1.8	7.9
Place of residence: Rural area	1110	Ref.
Small or medium-sized city	1110	0.36	0.48	0	1
Suburban area	1110	0.08	0.27	0	1
Big city	1110	0.26	0.44	0	1
Party: CDU/CSU	1130	Ref.
SPD	1130	0.16	0.37	0	1
FDP	1130	0.12	0.33	0	1
GRÜNE	1130	0.15	0.35	0	1
DIE LINKE	1130	0.14	0.35	0	1
PIRATEN	1130	0.16	0.36	0	1
AfD	1130	0.12	0.32	0	1
Candidature: List	1130	Ref.
District	1130	0.23	0.42	0	1
District & list	1130	0.52	0.50	0	1
Incumbent	1130	0.11	0.31	0	1
Budget: 0–1k Euro	986	Ref.
1–5k Euro	986	0.29	0.45	0	1
5–15k Euro	986	0.17	0.37	0	1
>15k Euro	986	0.23	0.42	0	1
Campaign: Interviews/press releases	1105	0.68	0.28	0	1
Campaign: Campaign stand	1111	0.70	0.22	0	1
Campaign: Web page	1100	0.46	0.36	0	1
Campaign: Blog/Youtube	1096	0.20	0.29	0	1
Attitudes: Pro-welfare state	1105	0.60	0.31	0	1
Attitudes: Contra-immigration	1103	0.30	0.27	0	1
Personality: Extraversion	1103	0.37	0.25	0	1
Personality: Openness	1103	0.77	0.21	0	1

Source of data: Kaczmirek et al. (2014); Rattinger et al. (2014).

Table A2. Model for participation in candidate survey.

	Participation in candidate survey
	AME	SE
Party: CDU/CSU (Ref.)
Party: SPD	0.048	0.033
Party: FDP	−0.044	0.034
Party: GREEN party	0.038	0.035
Party: LEFT party	0.063^+	0.036
Party: PIRATES	0.031	0.036
Party: AfD	−0.052	0.034
Gender: Woman	−0.004	0.021
Age	0.000	0.001
Candidature: List (Ref.)
Candidature: District	0.091***	0.028
Candidature: District & list	0.174***	0.023
Incumbent	−0.302***	0.027
N	2706
McFadden’s R^2	0.047

Note: AME = average marginal effect; SE = standard error.

⁺p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < 0.

Kaczmirek, L., Mayr, P., Vatrapu, R., Bleier, A., Blumenberg, M., Gummer, T., & Wolf, C. (2014). Social Media monitoring of the campaigns for the 2013 German Bundestag elections on Facebook and Twitter. GESIS Working Paper 31. Köln, DE. Retrieved from http://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/38195

 Google Scholar

Rattinger, H., Roteutscher, S., Schmitt-Beck, R., Weels, B., & Wolf, C. (2014). Candidate campaign survey 2013 (GLES) data file version 3.0. Retrieved 16 March 2015, from http://www.gesis.org/en/elections-home/gles/data-and-documents/data/

 Google Scholar