The changing representation interface: democracy and direct contact with politicians

References

• Bartlett, J., Littler, M., McDonnell, D., & Froio, C. (2014). New political actors in Europe: Beppe Grillo and the M5S. London: Demos.
   Google Scholar
• Bimber, B. (2014). Digital media in the Obama campaigns of 2008 and 2012: Adaptation to the personalized political communication environment. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 11(2), 130–150. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2014.895691
   Google Scholar
• Blank, G., & Dutton, W. H. (2012). Age and trust in the internet: The centrality of experience and attitudes toward technology in Britain. Social Science Computer Review, 30(2), 135–151. doi: 10.1177/0894439310396186
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boulianne, S. (2009). Does internet use affect engagement? A meta-analysis of research. Political Communication, 26(2), 193–211. doi: 10.1080/10584600902854363
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• British Election Study. (2010). British election study campaign internet panel survey. Colchester: University of Essex.
   Google Scholar
• BSA. (2002). Statement of ethical practice. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Butler, D. M., Karpowitz, C. F., & Pope, J. C. (2012). A field experiment on legislators’ home styles: Service versus policy. The Journal of Politics, 74, 474–486. doi: 10.1017/S0022381611001708
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Calvey, D. (2008). The art and politics of covert research. Sociology, 42, 905–918. doi: 10.1177/0038038508094569
   Google Scholar
• Cardenal, A. S. (2013). Why mobilize support online? The paradox of party behaviour online. Party Politics, 19(1), 83–103. doi: 10.1177/1354068810395059
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cogburn, D. L., & Espinoza-Vasquez, F. K. (2011). From networked nominee to networked nation: Examining the impact of Web 2.0 and social media on political participation and civic engagement in the 2008 Obama campaign. Journal of Political Marketing, 10, 189–213. doi: 10.1080/15377857.2011.540224
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, S. (2005a). New mediation and direct representation: Reconceptualizing representation in the digital age. New Media and Society, 7(2), 177–198. doi: 10.1177/1461444805050745
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, S. (2005b). The lonely citizen: Indirect representation in an age of networks. Political Communication, 22(2), 197–214. doi: 10.1080/10584600590933197
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coleman, S., & Blumler, J. G. (2009). The internet and democratic citizenship: Theory, practice and policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coleman, S., & Shane, P. M. (Eds) (2011). Connecting democracy. Boston: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crabtree, J. (2010, March 7). Cameron's battle to connect. Wired.
   Google Scholar
• Curtice, J., Fisher, S., & Ford, R. (2010). The results analysed. In P. Cowley, & D. Kavanagh, (Eds.), The British general election of 2010 (Appendix Two, pp. 385–426). London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, L. (2011). Re-constructing digital democracy: an outline of four ‘positions’. New Media & Society, 13(6), 855–872. doi: 10.1177/1461444810389569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danczuk, S. (2014). A new politics: Let's give MPs a job description. Fabian Society. Comment.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, A. (2010). New media and fat democracy: The paradox of online participation. New Media & Society, 12(5), 745–761. doi: 10.1177/1461444809341435
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. (2002). Deliberative democracy and beyond: Liberals, critics, contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Electoral Commission. (2001). Voter engagement and young people. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Electoral Commission. (2012). Party finance. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Enli, G. S., & Skogerbø, E. (2013). Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics. Information, Communication & Society, 16(5), 757–774. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.782330
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ESRC. (2010). Framework for research ethics. Swindon: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Eulau, H., & Karps, P. D. (1977). The puzzle of representation: Specifying components of responsiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 2(3), 233–254. doi: 10.2307/439340
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Parliament. (2014). Turnout at European parliament elections. Brussels: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Fieldhouse, E., & Cutts, D. (2008). The effectiveness of local party campaigns in 2005: combining evidence from campaign spending and agent survey data. British Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 367–388. doi: 10.1017/S0007123409000726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher, J., Cutts, D., & Fieldhouse, E. (2011). Constituency campaigning in 2010. In D. Wring, R. Mortimore, & S. Atkinson, (Eds.), Political communication in Britain: TV debates, the media and the election (pp. 198–217). Basingstoke: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, J., & Denver, D. (2008). From foot-slogging to call centres and direct mail: a framework for analysing the development of district-level campaigning. European Journal of Political Research, 47(6), 794–826. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6765.2008.00785.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fitch, B., & Goldschmidt, K. (2005). Communicating with Congress: How Capitol Hill is coping with the surge in citizen advocacy. Washington, DC: Congressional Management Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. (2013). Party change, social media and the rise of ‘citizen-initiated’ campaigning. Party Politics, 1(1), 1–15.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R., & Cantijoch, M. (2011). Comparing online elections in Australia and the UK: Did 2010 finally produce ‘the internet election’? Communication, Politics and Culture, 44(2), 4–17.
   Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2011). Do online election campaigns win votes? The 2007 Australian YouTube election. Political Communication, 28(2), 227–244. doi: 10.1080/10584609.2011.568042
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. K., & McAllister, I. (2015). Normalising or Equalising Party Competition? Assessing the impact of the web on election campaigning. Political Studies, 63(3), 529–547. doi: 10.1111/1467-9248.12107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. K., & Rommele, A. (2001). Changing campaign communications: A party-centered theory of professionalized campaigning. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 6(4), 31–43. doi: 10.1177/108118001129172323
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson, R. K., Williamson, A., & Ward, S. (Eds.) (2012). The Internet and the 2010 Election—Putting the Small ‘p’ Back in Politics? London: Hansard Society.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, T., Jackson, D., & Broersma, M. (2014). New platform, old habits? Candidates’ use of Twitter during the 2010 British and Dutch general election campaigns. New Media & Society, 1–19. doi:10.1177/1461444814546728
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, D. P., & Gerber, A. S. (2004). Get out the vote! How to increase voter turnout. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
   Google Scholar
• Griffin, J. D., & Keane, M. (2006). Descriptive representation and the composition of African American turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 50(4), 998–1012. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00229.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halfon, R. (2011, February 3). Want to successfully lobby your MP? Make it personal and make it local. Guardian Professional.
   Google Scholar
• Hall, P. (1999). Social Capital in Britain. British Journal of Political Science, 29(3), 417–461. doi: 10.1017/S0007123499000204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansard Society. (2014). Audit of political engagement: The 2014 Report. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Hermans, L., & Vergeer, M. (2013). Personalization in e-campaigning: A cross-national comparison of personalization strategies used on candidate websites of 17 countries in EP elections 2009. New Media & Society, 15(1), 72–92. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457333
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herrera, C. D. (1999). Two arguments for ‘covert methods’ in social research. The British Journal of Sociology, 50(2), 331–343. doi: 10.1080/000713199358770
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. (2004). Email and political campaigning: the experience of MPs in Westminster. Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 2(5), 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, N. A. (2005). Vote winner or a nuisance: Email and elected politicians’ relationship with their constituents. Journal of Nonprofit and Public Sector Marketing, 14(1–2), 91–108. doi: 10.1300/J054v14n01_06
   Google Scholar
• Johnston, R., Pattie, C., Cutts, D., & Fisher, J. (2012). Spending, contacting, and voting: the 2010 British general election in the constituencies. Environment and Planning A, 44(5), 1165–1184. doi: 10.1068/a44382
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karpf, D. (2012). The move on effect: The unexpected transformation of American political advocacy. New York, NY: Oxford University.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, E. J., Barris, M., & Jain, A. (2013). The social media president: Barack Obama and the politics of digital engagement. New York, NY: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, B. (2002). Assessing the potential of internet political participation in the United States: A resource approach. American Politics Research, 30(5), 476–498. doi: 10.1177/1532673X02030005002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson, A. O. (2014). Online, all the time? A quantitative assessment of the permanent campaign on Facebook. New Media & Society, 1–19. doi:10.1177/1461444814538798
   Google Scholar
• Lee, B. (2014). Window dressing 2.0: Constituency-level web campaigns in the 2010 UK General Election. Politics, 34, 45–57. doi: 10.1111/1467-9256.12029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G. (2014). Political communication and cognition. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., & Jackson, N. A. (2010). Towards a more participatory style of election campaigning: The impact of Web 2.0 on the UK 2010 general election. Policy and Internet, 2(3), 67–96. doi: 10.2202/1944-2866.1064
   Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., & Jackson, N. A. (2013). Reaching inward not outward: Marketing via the Internet at the UK 2010 general election. Journal of Political Marketing, 12(2, 3), 244–261. doi: 10.1080/15377857.2013.781475
   Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D., Koc-Michalska, K., Schweitzer, E. J., Jacunski, M., Jackson, N. A., & Vedel, T. (2011). Informing, engaging, mobilizing or interacting: Searching for a European model of Web campaigning. European Journal of Communication, 26(3), 195–213. doi: 10.1177/0267323111416182
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lilleker, D. G., Tenscherbc, J., & Štětka, V. (2015). Towards hypermedia campaigning? Perceptions of new media's importance for campaigning by party strategists in comparative perspective. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7), 747–765. doi: 10.1080/1369118X.2014.993679
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malhotra, N., Michelson, M. R., & Valenzuela, A. A. (2012). Emails from official sources can increase turnout. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 7(3), 321–332. doi: 10.1561/100.00011073
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marcinowski, F., Metag, J., & Wattenberg, C. (2014). Why do candidates use online media in constituency campaigning? An application of the theory of planned behaviour. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 11(2), 151–168. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2014.895690
   Google Scholar
• Margetts, H. Z. (2011). Experiments for public management research. Public Management Review, 13(2), 189–208. doi: 10.1080/14719037.2010.532970
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Margolis, M., & Resnick, D. (2000). Politics as usual? The cyberspace revolution. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• McGregor, M. (2012). The use of email in the 2010 Election. In R. K. Gibson, A. Williamson, & S. Ward (Eds.), The Internet and the 2010 Election—Putting the small ‘p’ back in politics? (pp. 33–42). London: Hansard Society.
   Google Scholar
• Meyers-Levy, J., & Loken, B. (2014). Revisiting gender differences: What we know and what lies ahead. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 25(1), 129–149. doi: 10.1016/j.jcps.2014.06.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nickerson, D. W. (2007). Does email boost turnout? Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2(4), 369–379. doi: 10.1561/100.00007032
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen, R. K. (2011). Mundane internet tools, mobilizing practices, and the coproduction of citizenship in political campaigns. New Media & Society, 13(5), 755–771. doi: 10.1177/1461444810380863
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nielsen, R. K., & Vaccari, C. (2013). Do people ‘like’ candidates on Facebook? Not really: Large-scale direct candidate-to-voter online communication as an outlier phenomenon. International Journal of Communication, 7, 2333–2356.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing political activism. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2003). Preaching to the converted? Pluralism, participation and party Websites. Party Politics, 9(1), 21–45. doi: 10.1177/135406880391003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, P., & Curtice, J. (2008). Getting the Message Out: A two-step model of the role of the Internet in campaign communication flows during the 2005 British General Election. The Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 4(4), 3–13. doi: 10.1080/19331680801975359
   Google Scholar
• Ofcom. (2014). The communications market report. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• ONS. (2013). Internet access quarterly update. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Ormston, R., & Curtice, J. (2014). 32nd British social attitudes report. London: NatCen.
   Google Scholar
• Page, S. (2000). Community research: The lost art of unobtrusive methods. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30(10), 2126–2136. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02428.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pattie, C., Seyd, P., & Whitely, P. (2004). Citizenship in Britain, values, participation and democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Pidd, H. (2010, August 9). Conservative MP tried to remove email address from websites. The Guardian.
   Google Scholar
• Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Rallings, C., & Thrasher, M. (2008). Constituency database. Retrieved from http://election.pressassociation.com/constituencies.html
   Google Scholar
• Richards, D., & Smith, M. J. (2015). In defence of British politics against the British political tradition. The Political Quarterly, 86(1), 41–51. doi: 10.1111/1467-923X.12137
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, A., & Duggan, M. (2012). The state of the 2012 Election. Washington, DC: Pew.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A., & Rainie, L. (2008). The internet and the 2008 election. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
   Google Scholar
• Southern, R., & Ward, S. (2011). Below the radar? Online campaigning at the local level in the 2010 Election. In D. Wring, R. Mortimore, & S. Atkinson, (Eds.), Political communication in Britain (pp. 218–240). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Spicker, P. (2011). Ethical covert research. Sociology, 45(2), 118–133. doi: 10.1177/0038038510387195
   Google Scholar
• SRA. (2003). Ethical guidelines. London: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Strandberg, K. (2013). A social media revolution or just a case of history repeating itself? The use of social media in the 2011 Finnish parliamentary elections. New Media & Society, 15, 1329–1347. doi: 10.1177/1461444812470612
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stromer-Galley, J., & Foot, K. A. (2002). Citizen perceptions of online interactivity and implications for political campaign communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(1), 1083–1090.
   Google Scholar
• Townsend, J. (2009, February 19). Obama's digital guru at City: “Email is still the killer app”. Retrieved July, 2013, from http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2009/02/19/obamas-digital-guru-aka-thomas-gensemer-at-city-email-is-still-the-killer-app/#sthash.84eWSJ2z.dpuf
   Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2013). A tale of two e-Parties: Candidate websites in the 2008 US presidential primaries. Party Politics, 19, 19–40. doi: 10.1177/1354068810391287
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C. (2014). You've got (no) mail: How parties and candidates respond to e-mail inquiries in western democracies. Journal of Information Technology and Politics, 11, 245–258. doi: 10.1080/19331681.2014.899536
   Google Scholar
• Vaccari, C., & Valeriani, A. (2015). Follow the leader! Direct and indirect flows of political communication during the 2013 Italian general election campaign. New Media & Society, 17, 1025–1042. doi: 10.1177/1461444813511038
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M. (2013). Politics, elections and online campaigning: Past, present and a peek into the future. New Media Society, 15(1), 9–17. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457327
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Cunha, C. (2013). Web campaigning in the 2009 European parliament elections: A cross-national comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 15, 128–148. doi: 10.1177/1461444812457337
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vergeer, M., Hermans, L., & Sams, S. (2013). Online social networks and micro-blogging in political campaigning: The exploration of a new campaign tool and a new campaign style. Party Politics, 19(3), 477–501. doi: 10.1177/1354068811407580
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vivyan, N., & Wagner, M. (2015). What do voters want from their local MP? The Political Quarterly, 86(1), 33–40. doi: 10.1111/1467-923X.12128
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ward, S., Owen, D., Davis, R., & Taras, D. (Eds). (2008). Making a difference: A comparative view of the role of the internet in election politics. Lanham: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., & Sechrest, L. (1999). Unobtrusive Measures. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Weiser, E. (2000). Gender differences in Internet use patterns and Internet application preferences: A two-sample comparison. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 3(2), 167–178. doi: 10.1089/109493100316012
   Google Scholar
• Whitely, P., & Seyd, P. (2003). How to win by a landslide by really trying: The effects of local campaigning on voting in the 1997 British general election. Electoral Studies, 22(2), 301–324. doi: 10.1016/S0261-3794(02)00017-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, T. (2010). What are MPs for? The Political Quarterly, 81(3), 298–308. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-923X.2010.02100.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar