Pacts with Twitter. Predicting voters' indecision and preferences for coalitions in multiparty systems

References

• Adamic, L., & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 U.S. election: Divided they blog. 3rd International workshop on link discovery, KDD'05, Chicago, IL, pp. 36–43.
   Google Scholar
• Anduiza, E., Cristancho, C., & Sabucedo, J. (2013). Mobilization through online social networks: The political protest of the indignados in Spain. Information, Communication & Society. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.808360
   Google Scholar
• Asur, S., & Huberman, B. A. (2010). Predicting the future with social media. 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM international conference on web intelligence and intelligent agent technology, Vol. 1, WI-IAT'10, Washington, DC, pp. 492–499.
   Google Scholar
• Bandari, R., Asur, S., & Huberman, B. A. (2012). The pulse of news in social media: Forecasting popularity. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.0332v1
   Google Scholar
• Barabási, A. (2003). Linked: How everything is connected to everything else and what it means for business, science, and everyday life. New York, NY: Plume.
   Google Scholar
• Barbera, P. (2012). A new measure of party identification in Twitter. Evidence from Spain. Paper presented at the second EPSA conference, Berlin, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Bollen, J., Mao, H., & Zeng, X.-J. (2010). Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational Science, 2(1), 1–8. doi:10.1016/j.jocs.2010.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boutet, A., Kim, H., & Yoneki, E. (2012). What's in your tweets? I know who you supported in the UK 2010 general election. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), Dublin, Ireland.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2011, September). Six provocations for big data. A decade in internet time. Paper presented at the Symposium on the Dynamics of the Internet and Society, Oxford, UK.
   Google Scholar
• boyd, d., Golder, S., & Lotan, G. (2010, January). Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter. Paper presented at the meeting of HICSS-43, IEEE, Kauai, HI.
   Google Scholar
• Bruns, A. (2012). How long is a tweet? Mapping dynamic conversation networks on Twitter using Gawk and Gephi, information. Communication & Society, 15, 1323–1351. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2011.635214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas. (2012). Postelectoral de Cataluña. Elecciones Autonómicas 2012. Estudio n° 2.790. Retrieved from http://www.cis.es/cis/opencms/ES/NoticiasNovedades/InfoCIS/2013/Documentacion_2970.html
   Google Scholar
• Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, K. P. (2010, May). Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. Paper presented at the meeting of Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Chadwick, A. (2006). Internet politics: States, citizens and new communication technologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clauset, A., Shalizi, C. R., & Newman, M. E. J. (2009). Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review, 51(4), 661–703.
   Google Scholar
• Conover, M., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Gonçalves, B., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2011). Political polarization on Twitter. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, ICWSM-11, Barcelona, pp. 89–96.
   Google Scholar
• Conover, M., Gonçalves, B., Ratkiewicz, J., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2011). Predicting the political alignment of twitter users. Proceedings of 3rd IEEE conference on social computing (SocialCom), IEEE, Boston, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Corominas-Murtra, B., & Solé, R. V. (2010). Universality of Zipf's law. Physical Review E, 82, 011102. doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.82.011102
   Google Scholar
• Feller, A., Kuhnert, M., Sprenger, T. O., & Welpe, I. M. (2011). Divided they tweet: The network structure of political microbloggers and discussion topics. In N. Nicolov & J. G. Shanahan (Eds.), Proceedings of the fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (pp. 474–477). Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gayo-Avello, D. (2012). I wanted to predict elections with twitter and all I got was this lousy paper – a balanced survey on election prediction using Twitter data. Retrieved from arXiv:1204.6441
   Google Scholar
• Gayo-Avello, D. (2013). A meta-analysis of state-of-the-art electoral prediction from Twitter data. Social Science Computer Review, 31, 649–679. doi:10.1177/0894439313493979
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Generalitat de Catalunya. (2012). Eleccions al Parlament de Catalunya 2012 – Resultats definitius. Retrieved from http://www.gencat.cat/governacio/resultats-parlament2012/ini09v.htm
   Google Scholar
• Giordano, B., & Roller, E. (2002). Catalonia and the ‘Idea of Europe’: Competing strategies and discourses within Catalan party politics. European Urban and Regional Studies, 9, 99–113. doi:10.1177/096977640200900201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goel, S., Hofman, J. M., Lahaie, S., Pennock, D. M., & Watts, D. J. (2010). Predicting consumer behavior with web search. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 107, 17486–17490.
   Google Scholar
• Hemphill, L., Otterbacher, J., & Shapiro, M. (2013). What's Congress doing on Twitter? Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work. New York, NY: ACM, pp. 877–886. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2441776.2441876
   Google Scholar
• Himelboim, I., McCreery, S., & Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18, 40–60. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopmann, D. N., Vliegenthart, R., De Vreese, C., & Albæk, E. (2010). Effects of election news coverage: How visibility and tone influence party choice. Political Communication, 27, 389–405. doi:10.1080/10584609.2010.516798
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huckfeldt, R., & Sprague, J. (1995). Citizens, politics and social communication: Information and influence in an election campaign. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ikeda, K., & Huckfeldt, R. (2001). Political communication and disagreement among citizens in Japan and the United States. Political Behavior, 23, 23–52. doi:10.1023/A:1017617630744
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jungherr, A., Jürgens, P., & Schoen, H. (2011). Why the pirate party won the German election of 2009 or the trouble with predictions: A response to Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sander, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. “Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment”. Social Science Computer Review, 30(2), 229–234. doi:10.1177/0894439311404119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim, M., & Park, H. W. (2012). Measuring Twitter-based political participation and deliberation in the South Korean context by using social network and Triple Helix indicators. Scientometrics, 90(1), 121–140. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0508-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knoke, D. (1990). Networks of political action: Toward theory construction. Social Forces, 68, 1041–1063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwak, H., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010). What is Twitter: A social network or a news media. Proceedings of the 19th international conference on the World Wide Web. New York, NY: ACM, pp. 591–600.
   Google Scholar
• Lampos, V., & Cristianini, N. (2010). Tracking the flu pandemic by monitoring the social web. Retrieved from http://patterns.enm.bris.ac.uk/publications/tracking-the-flu#
   Google Scholar
• Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., & Gaudet, H. (1948). The people's choice. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lazer, D., Rubineau, B., Chetkovich, C., Katz, N., & Neblo, M. (2010). The coevolution of networks and political attitudes. Political Communication, 27(3), 248–274. doi:10.1080/10584609.2010.500187
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lerman, K., & Ghosh, R. (2010). Information contagion: An empirical study of the spread of news on Digg and Twitter social networks. Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), Washington, DC. Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Letierce, J., Passant, A., Breslin, J., & Decker, S. (2010, April). Understanding how Twitter is used to spread scientific messages. Proceedings of the WebSci10: Extending the frontiers of society on-line, Raleigh, NC.
   Google Scholar
• Liu, Z., Liu, L., & Li, H. (2012). Determinants of information retweeting in microblogging. Internet Research, 22, 443–466. doi:10.1108/10662241211250980
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livne, A., Simmons, M. P., Adar, E., & Adamic, L. A. (2011). The party is over here: Structure and content in the 2010 election. Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Barcelona. Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Logunov, A. (2011). A tweet in time: Can Twitter sentiment analysis improve economic indicator estimation and predict market returns? (Bachelor's thesis). Economics, University of New South Wales.
   Google Scholar
• Loomis, C. (1946). Political and occupational cleavages in a Hanoverian village. Sociometry, 9, 316–333.
   Google Scholar
• Lusoli, W., Ward, S., & Gibson, R. (2006). (Re)connecting politics? Parliament, the public and the internet. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(1), 24–42. doi:10.1093/pa/gsj010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manovich, L. (2011). Trending: The promises and the challenges of big social data. In M. Gold (Ed.), Debates in the digital humanities (pp. 460–475). Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Martí, D. (2013). The 2012 Catalan election: The first step towards independence? Regional & Federal Studies, 23, 507–516. doi:10.1080/13597566.2013.806302
   Google Scholar
• McCombs, M. (2005). A look at agenda-setting: Past, present and future. Journalism Studies, 6, 543–557. doi:10.1080/14616700500250438
   Google Scholar
• McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micó, J. L., & Casero-Ripollés, A. (2013). Political activism online: Organization and media relations in the case of 15M in Spain. Information, Communication & Society. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2013.830634
   Google Scholar
• Newman, M. E. J. (2005). Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law. Contemporary Physics, 46(5), 323–351. doi:10.1016/j.cities.2012.03.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Connor, B., Balasubramanyan, R., Routledge, B. R., & Smith, N. A. (2010). From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), Washington, DC. Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pérez Tornero, J. M., Fernández, N., Cervi, L., & Giraldo, S. (2010). E Parliament in Catalonia: Fostering ‘active’ or ‘Catalan’ citizenship? Paper presented at the meeting of Networking democracy: New media innovations in participatory politics, Babes-Bolyai University, Cluj, Romania.
   Google Scholar
• Polat, R. K. (2005). The internet and political participation: Exploring the explanatory links. European Journal of Communication, 20, 435–459. doi:10.1177/0267323105058251
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Romero, D. M., Meeder, B., & Kleinberg, J. M. (2011). Differences in the mechanics of information diffusion across topics: Idioms, political hashtags, and complex contagion on twitter. Proceedings of the 20th International conference on World Wide Web (pp. 695–704), WWW'11, New York, NY.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenman, E. T. R. (2012). Retweets – but not just retweets: Quantifying and predicting influence on Twitter (Bachelor's thesis). Applied Mathematics, Harvard College, Cambridge, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Schill, D., & Kirk, R. (2013). Courting the swing voter: “Real time” insights into the 2008 and 2012 U.S. presidential debates. American Behavioral Scientist. doi:10.1177/0002764213506204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skoric, M., Poor, N., Achananuparp, P., Lim, E.-P., & Jiang, J. (2012, January). Tweets and votes: A study of the 2011 Singapore general election. Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, pp. 2583–2591.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., & Rainie, L. (2008). The internet and the 2008 election. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
   Google Scholar
• Starbird, K., & Palen, L. (2010). Pass it on?: Retweeting in mass emergencies. Paper presented at the 2010 Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference (ISCRAM 2010), Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Suh, B., Hong, L., Pirolli, P., & Chi, E. H. (2010). Want to be retweeted? Large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in Twitter network. Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Conference on Social Computing, Minneapolis, MN. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 177–184.
   Google Scholar
• Sunstein, C. (2006). Republic 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tjong, E., Sang, K., & Bos, J. (2012, April). Predicting the 2011 Dutch Senate election results with Twitter. Proceedings of SASN 2012, the EACL 2012 workshop on semantic analysis in social networks, Avignon, France.
   Google Scholar
• Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sandner, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. (2010). Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Paper presented at the meeting of Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Weng, J., Lim, E. P., Jiang, J., & He, Q. (2010). Twitterrank: Finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining. New York, NY: ACM, pp. 261–270. Retrieved from http://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sis_research/504/
   Google Scholar
• Wu, S., Hofman, J. M., Mason, W. A., & Watts, D. J. (2011). Who says what to whom on twitter. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web. New York, NY: ACM, pp. 705–714. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1963504
   Google Scholar
• Yardi, S., & boyd, d. (2010). Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on Twitter. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 30, 316–327. doi:10.1177/0270467610380011
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerman, A. S. (2005). Returning to the social logic of politics. In A. S. Zuckerman (Ed.), The social logic of politics: Personal networks as contexts for political behavior (pp. 3–20). Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar