Becoming a Presidential Candidate: Social Media Following and Politician Identification

REFERENCES

• Adams, A., & McCorkindale, T. (2013). Dialogue and transparency: A content analysis of how the 2012 presidential candidates used Twitter. Public Relations Review, 39, 357–359. doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2013.07.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basil, M. D., & Brown, W. J. (1997). Marketing AIDS prevention: The differential impact hypothesis versus identification effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 6, 389–411. doi:10.1207/s15327663jcp0604_04
   Google Scholar
• Busselle, R., & Bilandzic, H. (2009). Measuring narrative engagement. Media Psychology, 12, 321–347. doi:10.1080/15213260903287259
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung, A. H., & Slater, M. D. (2013). Reducing stigma and out-group distinctions through perspective-taking in narratives. Journal of Communication, 63, 894–911. doi:10.1111/jcom.12050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, E. L., & Tyler, W. J. (2016). Examining perceived distance and personal authenticity as mediators of the effects of ghost-tweeting on parasocial interaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19, 342–346. doi:10/1089/cyber.2015.0657
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4, 245–264. doi:10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, J., & Holbert, R. L. (2018). Assessing the predictive value of parasocial relationship intensity in a political context. Communication Research. Advanced online copy. doi:10.1177/0093650218759446
   Google Scholar
• Druckman, J. N., Kifer, M. J., & Parkin, M. (2007). The technological development of congressional candidate web sites: How and why candidates use web innovations. Social Science Computer Review, 25, 425–442. doi:10/1177/0894439307305623
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication, 32, 50–61. doi:10.1177/0267323116682802
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enli, G., & Skogerbø, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centered politics: Twitter and Facebook as arenas for political communication. Information, Communication & Society, 16, 757–774. doi:10/1080/1369118x.2013.782330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans, H. K., Brown, J. K., & Wimberly, T. (2017). “Delete your account”: The 2016 presidential race on Twitter. Science Computer Review. Advanced online copy. doi:10/1177/0894439317728722
   Google Scholar
• Evans, H. K., Cordova, V., & Sipole, S. (2014). Twitter style: An analysis of how house candidates used Twitter in their 2012 campaigns. PS: Political Science and Politics, 47, 454–462. doi:10.1017/S1049096514000389
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyal, K., & Dailey, R. M. (2012). Examining relational maintenance in parasocial relationships. Mass Communication & Society, 15, 758–781. doi:10.1080/15205436.2011.616276
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gil de Zuniga, H., Weeks, B., & Ardevol-Abreu, A. (2017). Effects of news-finds-me perception in communication: Social media use implications for news seeking and learning about politics. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22, 105–123. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12185
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giles, D. C. (2002). Parasocial interaction: A review of the literature and a model for future research. Media Psychology, 4, 279–305. doi:10/1207/S1532785XMEP0403_04
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Golbeck, J., Grimes, J. M., & Rogers, A. (2010). Twitter use by the US congress. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61, 1612–1621. doi:10.1002/asi.21344
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, M. C., & Brock, T. C. (2000). The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 701–721. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.701
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hayes, A. F. (2012). PROCESS: A versatile computational tool for observed variable mediation, moderation, and conditional process modeling [White paper]. Retrieved from www.afhayes.com/public/process2012.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Horton, D., & Wohl, R. (1956). Mass communication and para-social interaction: Observations on intimacy at a distance. Psychiatry, 19, 215–229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, M. D. (2013). Cultural characters and climate change: How heroes shape our perception of climate science. Social Science Quarterly., 95, 1–39. doi:10.1111/ssqu/12043
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, M. D. (2014). Communicating climate change: Are stories better than “just the facts”? Policy Studies Journal, 42, 644–673. doi:10.1111/psj.12072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kreiss, D. (2012). Acting in the public sphere: The 2008 Obama campaign’s strategic use of new media to shape narratives of the presidential race. Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, 33, 195–223.
   Google Scholar
• Kreiss, D. (2016). Seizing the moment: The presidential campaigns’ use of Twitter during the 2012 electoral cycle. New Media & Society, 18, 1473–1490. doi:10.1177/1461444814562445
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruikemeier, S. (2014). How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes. Computers in Human Behavior, 34, 131–139. doi:10/1016/j.chb.2014.01.025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kruikemeir, S., van Noort, G., Vliegenthart, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2013). Getting closer: The effects of personalized and interactive online political communication. European Journal of Communication, 28, 53–66. doi:10.1177/0267323112464837
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, E. J., & Jang, J. W. (2013). Not so imaginary interpersonal contact with public figures on social network sites: How affiliative tendency moderates its effects. Communication Research, 40, 27–51. doi:10/1177/0093650211431579
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, E. J., & Oh, S. Y. (2012). To personalize or depersonalize? When and how politicians’ personalized tweets affect the public’s reactions. Journal of Communication, 62, 932–949. doi:10/1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01681.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, E. J., & Shin, S. Y. (2012). Are they talking to me? Cognitive and affective effects of interactivity in politicians’ Twitter communication. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15, 515–520. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0228
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, E.-J., & Shin, S. Y. (2014). When the medium is the message: How transportability moderates the effects of politicians’ Twitter communication. Communication Research, 41, 1088–1110. doi:10.1177/0093650212466407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy, M. R. (1979). Watching TV news as para‐social interaction. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 23, 69–80. doi:10/1080/08838157909363919
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livingston, S. M. (1998). Making sense of television: The psychology of audience interpretation. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Lyons, B. A., & Veenstra, A. S. (2016). How (not) to talk on Twitter: Effects of politicians’ tweets on perceptions of the Twitter environment. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19, 8–15. doi:10/1089/cyber/2015.0319
   Google Scholar
• Macafee, T., McLaughlin, B., & Rodriguez, N. S. (2019). Winning on social media: Candidate social-mediated communication and voting during the 2016 US presidential election. Social Media+ Society, 5(1), 1–10. 2056305119826130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGregor, S. C., Lawrence, R. G., & Cardona, A. (2017). Personalization, gender, and social media: Gubernatorial candidates’ social media strategies. Information, Communication & Society, 20, 264–283. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1167228
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, B., Thompson, B., & Krause, A. (2018). Political fiction: Political e-mails during the 2014 U.S. midterm election. Social Science Computer Review, 36, 277–295. doi:10.1177/0894439317718536
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, B., & Velez, J. (2019). Imagined politics: How different media platforms transport citizens into political narratives. Social Science Computer Review, 37, 22–27. doi:10.1177/0894439317746327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaughlin, B., Velez, J., & Dunn, J. (2019). The political world within: How citizens process and experience political narratives. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43, 156–172. doi:10.1080/23808985.2019.1597635
   Google Scholar
• Meeks, L. (2016). Gendered styles, gendered differences: Candidates’ use of personalizaion and interactivity on Twitter. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 13, 295–310. doi:10.1080/19331681.2016.1160268
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meeks, L. (2017). Getting personal: Effects of Twitter personalization on candidate evaluations. Gender & Politics, 13, 1–25. doi:10.1017/S1743923X16000696
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moyer‐Gusé, E. (2008). Toward a theory of entertainment persuasion: Explaining the persuasive effects of entertainment‐education messages. Communication Theory, 18, 407–425. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2008.00328.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Namkoong, K., Fung, T. K., & Scheufele, D. A. (2012). The politics of emotion: News media attention, emotional responses, and participation during the 2004 US presidential election. Mass Communication & Society, 15, 25–45. doi:10.1080/15205436.2011.563894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oatley, K. (1995). A taxonomy of the emotions of literary response and a theory of identification in fictional narrative. Poetics, 23, 53–74. doi:10.1016/0304-422x(94)P4296-S
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parmelee, J. H., & Bichard, S. L. (2011). Politics and the twitter revolution: How tweets influence the relationship between political leaders and the public. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson, M., & Monroe, K. R. (1998). Narrative in political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 1, 315–331. doi:10.1146/annurev.polisci.1.1.315
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polletta, F. (2006). It was like a fever: Storytelling in protest and politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Polletta, F. (2015). Characters in political storytelling. Storytelling, Self, Society, 11, 34–55. doi:10.13110/storselfsoci.11.1.0034
   Google Scholar
• Polletta, F., & Callahan, J. (2017). Deep stories, nostalgia narratives, and fake news: Storytelling in the Trump era. American Journal of Cultural Sociology, 5, 392–408. doi:10.1057/s41290-017-0037-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polletta, F., Chen, P. C. B., Gardner, B. G., & Motes, A. (2011). The sociology of storytelling. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 109–130. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-081309-150106
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, F., Ahern, L., & Baker, M. (2014). Stories that count: Influence of news narratives of issue attitudes. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91, 98–117. doi:10.1177/1077699013514414
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slater, M. D., Ewoldsen, D. R., & Woods, K. W. (2018). Extending conceptualization and measurement of narrative engagement after-the-fact: Parasocial relationship and retrospective imaginative involvement. Media Psychology, 21, 329–351. doi:10.1080/15213269.2017.1328313
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stromer-Galley, J. (2014). Presidential campaigning in the internet age. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sundar, S. S., Kalyanaraman, S., & Brown, J. (2003). Explicating web site interactivity. Communication Research, 30, 30–59. doi:10.1177/0093650202239025
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorson, K. S., & Rodgers, S. (2006). Relationships between blogs as eWOM and interactivity, perceived interactivity, and parasocial interaction. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 6, 5–44. doi:10.1080/15252019.2006.10722117
   Google Scholar
• Tian, W., & Hoffner, C. A. (2010). Parasocial interaction with liked, neutral, and disliked characters on a popular TV series. Mass Communication & Society, 13, 250–269. doi:10.1080/15205430903296051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vafeiadis, M., Li, R., & Shen, F. (2018). Narratives in political advertising: An analysis of the political advertisements in the 2014 midterm elections. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62, 354–370. doi:10.1080/08838151.2018.1451858
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M. (2013). Politics, elections and online campaigns: Past, present… and a peek into the future. New Media & Society, 15, 9–17. doi:10.1177/1461444812457327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wojcieszak, M., & Kim, N. (2016). How to improve attitudes toward disliked groups: The effects of narrative versus numerical evidence on political persuasion. Communication Research, 43, 785–809. doi:10.1177/0093650215618480
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar