Googling for Trump: investigating online information seeking during the 2016 US presidential election

References

• Arendt, F., & Scherr, S. (2016). Optimizing online suicide prevention: A search engine-based tailored approach. Health Communication, 32, 1403–1408. doi:10.1080/10410236.2016.1224451
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Atkin, C. (1973). Instrumental utilities and information seeking. In P. Clarke (Ed.), New models for mass communication research (pp. 205–242). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Baumeister, R., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C., & Vohs, K. (2001). Bad is stronger than good. Review of General Psychology, 5, 323–370. doi:10.1037//1089-2680.5.4.323 doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.5.4.323
   Google Scholar
• Berlyne, D. (1960). Conflict, arousal, and curiosity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Camaj, L. (2014). Need for orientation, selective exposure, and attribute agenda-setting effects. Mass Communication and Society, 17, 689–712. doi: 10.1080/15205436.2013.835424
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camaj, L., & Weaver, D. (2013). Need for orientation and attribute agenda-setting during a U.S. election campaign. International Journal of Communication, 7, 1464–1463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chai, S., & Sasaki, N. (2011). Using online tools to assess public responses to climate change mitigation policies in Japan. Future Internet, 3, 117–129. doi: 10.3390/fi3020117
   Google Scholar
• Chitika. (2017). The value of Google result positioning. Retrieved from https://perma.cc/7AGC-HTDH
   Google Scholar
• Dervin, B. (1983, May). An overview of sense-making research: Concepts, methods and results. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association. Dallas, TX.
   Google Scholar
• Dervin, B. (1998). Sense-making theory and practice: An overview of user interests in knowledge seeking and use. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2, 36–46. doi: 10.1108/13673279810249369
   Google Scholar
• Epstein, R., & Robertson, R. (2015). The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections. PNAS, 112, E4512–E4521. doi:10.1073/pnas.141828112 doi: 10.1073/pnas.1419828112
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farnsworth, S., & Owen, D. (2004). Internet use and the 2000 presidential election. Electoral Studies, 23, 415–429. doi: 10.1016/S0261-3794(03)00029-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, R. K. (2009). Politically motivated reinforcement seeking: Reframing the selective exposure debate. Journal of Communication, 59, 676–699. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2009.01452.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelman, A. (2016). 19 lessons for political scientists from the 2016 election. Retrieved from http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2016/12/_19_lessons_for_political_scientists_from_the_2016_election.html
   Google Scholar
• Granka, L. (2013). Using online search traffic to predict US presidential elections. Political Science & Politics, 46, 271–279. doi: 10.1017/S1049096513000292
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hillis, K., Petit, M., & Jarrett, K. (2013). Google and the culture of search. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kaesbauer, M., Hohenstatt, R., & Reed, R. (2012). Direct versus search engine traffic: An innovative approach to demand analysis in the property market. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 5, 392–413. doi: 10.1108/17538271211268538
   Google Scholar
• Kathuria, A., Jansen, B. J., Hafernik, C., & Spink, A. (2010). Classifying the user intent of web queries using k-means clustering. Internet Research, 20, 563–581. doi: 10.1108/10662241011084112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kink, N., & Hess, T. (2008). Search engines as substitutes for traditional information sources? An investigation of media choice. The Information Society, 24, 18–29. doi: 10.1080/01972240701771630
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knobloch-Westerwick, S. (2015). Choice and preference in media use. Advances in selective exposure theory and research. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lazer, D., Kennedy, R., King, G., & Vespignani, A. (2014). The parable of Google flu: Traps in big data analysis. Science, 343, 1203–1205. doi: 10.1126/science.1248506
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lui, C., Metaxas, P. T., & Mustafaraj, E. (2011, March). On the predictability of the U.S. elections through search volume activity. Proceedings of the IADIS International Conference on e-Society, Avila, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Matthes, J. (2005). The need for orientation towards news media: Revising and validating a classic concept. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 18, 422–444. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edh118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nuti, S. V., Wayda, B., Runasinghe, I., Wang, S., Dryer, R. P., Chen, S. I., & Murugiah, K. (2014). The use of Google trends in health care research: A systematic review. PLOS One, 9(10), e109583. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0109583
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohr, D., & Schrott, P. (2001). Campaigns and information seeking: Evidence from a German state election. European Journal of Communication, 16, 419–449. doi: 10.1177/0267323101016004001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, B., Hembrooke, H., Joachims, T., Lorigo, L., Gay, G., & Granka, L. (2007). In Google we trust: Users’ decisions on rank, position, and relevance. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 801–823. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00351.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patterson, T. E. (2016). News coverage of the 2016 general election: How the press failed the voters (HKS Working Paper No. RWP16-052). Retrieved from https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2884837
   Google Scholar
• Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2009). The Internet’s role in campaign 2008. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2009/04/15/the-internets-role-in-campaign-2008/
   Google Scholar
• Purcell, K., Brenner, J., & Rainie, L. (2012). Search engine use 2012. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
   Google Scholar
• Rozin, P., & Royzman, E. B. (2001). Negativity bias, negativity dominance, and contagion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 5, 296–320. doi: 10.1207/S15327957PSPR0504_2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scharkow, M., & Vogelgesang, J. (2011). Measuring the public agenda using search engine queries. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23, 104–113. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edq048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz, W. (2014). Political communication in long-term perspective. In C. Reinemann (Ed.), Political communication (pp. 63–86). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Shultz, D. (2016). Could Google influence the presidential election? Retrieved from http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/10/could-google-influence-presidential-election
   Google Scholar
• Takala, R. (2016). Google denies manipulating search results to favor Hillary Clinton. The Washington Examiner. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/google-appears-to-be-manipulating-search-results-to-help-hillary-clinton/article/2593562
   Google Scholar
• Trevisan, F., Hoskins, A., Oates, S., & Mahlouly, D. (2016). The Google voter: Search engines and elections in the new media ecology. Information, Communication & Society, 21, 111–128. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1261171
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weaver, D. H. (1980). Audience need for orientation and media effects. Communication Research, 7, 361–373. doi: 10.1177/009365028000700305
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilson, T. (2000). Human information behavior. Informing Science, 3, 49–56. doi: 10.28945/576
   Google Scholar
• Wodak, R., Mral, B., & Khosravinik, M. (2013). Right wing populism in Europe: Politics and discourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
   Google Scholar