IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/poango/v8y2020i2p311-325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discourse Networks and Dual Screening: Analyzing Roles, Content and Motivations in Political Twitter Conversations

Author

Listed:
  • Felix Bossner

    (Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany)

  • Melanie Nagel

    (Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany)

Abstract

The increasing relevance of social networking platforms is accompanied by a growing number of studies using digital trace data. However, most studies still lack further understanding of the data-generating process. This analytical gap can be directly attributed to the prevalence of quantitative approaches, as only qualitative work is able to generate these insights. The broad methodological toolset of Discourse Network Analysis addresses this shortcoming as it combines both qualitative and quantitative approaches. The present study therefore employs Discourse Network Analysis in order to (1) determine different user groups’ varying role as senders and recipients of targeted online conversations, (2) identify and compare Twitter users’ (simultaneous) reference to different forms of conversational Twitter content, and to (3) asses the motivation of @message authors to direct particular tweets at particular user groups. To this end, this study analyzes @messages during the BBC program ‘Question Time’ on 2nd of June 2017—the final media encounter of Prime Minister Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn in the context of the 2017 UK election campaign. We draw on the theoretical background of Maarten Hajer’s discourse coalitions approach in order to investigate the preconditions for the formation of discourse coalitions in new and emerging virtual discourse arenas. Thus, our work not only mirrors the focus in existing literature on Twitter usage during high-profile political media events, but also emphasizes Twitter’s unique features for interactive exchange. This article identifies different forms of meta-talk and policy issues, which vary in both their general popularity with Twitter users as well as their interconnectedness. Furthermore, our analysis uncovers the motivation behind the decisions of @message authors to send particular @messages to certain groups of Twitter users. Finally, we could establish that media events only temporarily affect the topical foci of @message authors.

Suggested Citation

  • Felix Bossner & Melanie Nagel, 2020. "Discourse Networks and Dual Screening: Analyzing Roles, Content and Motivations in Political Twitter Conversations," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 311-325.
  • Handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:311-325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/2573
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Borondo, J. & Morales, A.J. & Benito, R.M. & Losada, J.C., 2014. "Mapping the online communication patterns of political conversations," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 414(C), pages 403-413.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Philip Leifeld, 2020. "Policy Debates and Discourse Network Analysis: A Research Agenda," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 180-183.
    2. Stefan Wallaschek & Kavyanjali Kaushik & Monika Verbalyte & Aleksandra Sojka & Giuliana Sorci & Hans-Jörg Trenz & Monika Eigmüller, 2022. "Same Same but Different? Gender Politics and (Trans-)National Value Contestation in Europe on Twitter," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 10(1), pages 146-160.
    3. Simon Schaub, 2021. "Public contestation over agricultural pollution: a discourse network analysis on narrative strategies in the policy process," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 783-821, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Darko Cherepnalkoski & Andreas Karpf & Igor Mozetič & Miha Grčar, 2016. "Cohesion and Coalition Formation in the European Parliament: Roll-Call Votes and Twitter Activities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(11), pages 1-27, November.
    2. Grover, Purva & Kar, Arpan Kumar & Dwivedi, Yogesh K. & Janssen, Marijn, 2019. "Polarization and acculturation in US Election 2016 outcomes – Can twitter analytics predict changes in voting preferences," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 438-460.
    3. Pace, Stefano & Buzzanca, Stefano & Fratocchi, Luciano, 2016. "The structure of conversations on social networks: Between dialogic and dialectic threads," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1144-1151.
    4. Borondo, J. & Morales, A.J. & Benito, R.M. & Losada, J.C., 2015. "Multiple leaders on a multilayer social media," Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 90-98.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:poango:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:311-325. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.