IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jscscx/v13y2023i1p5-d1304138.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reciprocal Communication and Political Deliberation on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Robert Ackland

    (School of Sociology, Australian National University, Canberra 2601, Australia)

  • Felix Gumbert

    (Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany)

  • Ole Pütz

    (Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany)

  • Bryan Gertzel

    (School of Sociology, Australian National University, Canberra 2601, Australia)

  • Matthias Orlikowski

    (Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University, 33615 Bielefeld, Germany)

Abstract

Social media platforms such as Twitter/X are increasingly important for political communication but the empirical question as to whether such communication enhances democratic consensus building (the ideal of deliberative democracy) or instead contributes to societal polarisation via fostering of hate speech and “information disorders” such as echo chambers is worth exploring. Political deliberation involves reciprocal communication between users, but much of the recent research into politics on social media has focused on one-to-many communication, in particular the sharing and diffusion of information on Twitter via retweets. This paper presents a new approach to studying reciprocal political communication on Twitter, with a focus on extending network-analytic indicators of deliberation. We use the Twitter v2 API to collect a new dataset (#debatenight2020) of reciprocal communication on Twitter during the first debate of the 2020 US presidential election and show that a hashtag-based collection alone would have collected only 1% of the debate-related communication. Previous work into using social network analysis to measure deliberation has involved using discussion tree networks to quantify the extent of argumentation (maximum depth) and representation (maximum width); we extend these measures by explicitly incorporating reciprocal communication (via triad census) and the political partisanship of users (inferred via usage of partisan hashtags). Using these methods, we find evidence for reciprocal communication among partisan actors, but also point to a need for further research to understand what forms this communication takes.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert Ackland & Felix Gumbert & Ole Pütz & Bryan Gertzel & Matthias Orlikowski, 2023. "Reciprocal Communication and Political Deliberation on Twitter," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-14, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:5-:d:1304138
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/1/5/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/13/1/5/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:gam:jscscx:v:13:y:2023:i:1:p:5-:d:1304138. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.