Advertisement

Scientometrics

, Volume 90, Issue 1, pp 121–140 | Cite as

Measuring Twitter-based political participation and deliberation in the South Korean context by using social network and Triple Helix indicators

  • Minjeong Kim
  • Han Woo Park
Article

Abstract

This study investigates the role of Twitter in political deliberation and participation by analyzing the ways in which South Korean politicians use Twitter. In addition, the study examines the rise of Twitter as user-generated communication system for political participation and deliberation by using the Triple Helix indicators. For this, we considered five prominent politicians, each belonging to one of four political parties, by using data collected in June 2010. The results suggest that non-mainstream, resource-deficient politicians are more likely to take advantage of Twitter’s potential as an alternative means of political participation and that a small number of Twitter users lead political discourse in the Twittersphere. We also examined the occurrence and co-occurrence of politicians’ names in Twitter posts, and then calculate entropy values for trilateral relationships. The results suggest that the level of political deliberation, expressed in terms of the level of balance in the communication system, is higher when politicians with different political orientations form the trilateral relationships.

Keywords

Twitter Triple Helix Politician Korea Polarization 

Mathematics Subject Classification

94A02 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was partly supported by the World Class University (WCU) project through the National Research Foundation of Korea, funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (No. 515-82-06574). The corresponding author is grateful for Ji-Young Park for data collection and visualization.

References

  1. Adamic, L. & Glance, N. (2005). The political blogosphere and the 2004 US election: Divided they blog. Japan: WWW2005. Accessed September 5, 2010, http://www.blogpulse.com/papers/2005/AdamicGlanceBlogWWW.pdf.
  2. Benkler, Y., & Shaw, A. (2010). A tale of two blogospheres: Discursive practices on the left and right. Accessed February 10, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1611312#%23.
  3. Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11.Google Scholar
  4. Bradshaw, P. (2008). Are these the biggest moments in journalism-blogging history? Online Journalism Blog, Accessed February 10, 2010, http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2008/11/20/are-these-the-biggest-moments-in-journalism-blogging-history/.
  5. Golbeck, J., Grimes, J. & Rogers, A. (2010). Use of Twitter by the US Congress. Human-computer interaction lab 27th annual symposium. Accessed January 20, 2011, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/about/events/symposium2010/Abstracts%20for%20Website/09_jen.pdf.
  6. Hansen, D., Shneiderman, B., & Smith, M. (Eds.). (2010). Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL. London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  7. Herold, D. K. (2009). Cultural politics and political culture of Web 2.0 in Asia. Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 22, 89–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Holmberg, K. (2010). Co-inlinking to a municipal Web space: A webometric and content analysis. Scientometrics, 83, 851–862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Holmberg, K., & Thelwall, M. (2009). Local government web sites in Finland: A geographic and webometric analysis. Scientometrics, 79(1), 157–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Khan, G. F., Moon, J. H., Park, H. W., Swar, B., & Rho, J. J. (2011). A socio-technical perspective on e-government issues in developing countries: A scientometrics approach. Scientometrics, 87(2), 267–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Khan, G. F., & Park, H. W. (2011 forthcoming). Measuring the Triple Helix on the Web: Longitudinal Trends in the University-Industry-Government Relationship in Korea. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology.Google Scholar
  13. Kwak, H. W., Lee, C., Park, H., & Moon, S. (2010). What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? Proceedings of the 19th international World Wide Web (WWW) conference. USA: Raleigh NC.Google Scholar
  14. Ladhani, N. (2010). Making a difference: 140 characters at a time. Social Policy Magazine, 43. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier Database.Google Scholar
  15. Last, J. (2009). Tweeting while Tehran burns. Current, 515, 9–10.Google Scholar
  16. Lee, Y., & Park, H. W. (2010). The reconfiguration of e-campaign practices in Korea: A case study of the presidential primaries of 2007. International Sociology, 25(1), 29–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Levy, J. (2008). Beyond “boxers or briefs?”: New media brings youth to politics like never before, Forum, Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.Google Scholar
  18. Leydesdorff, L. (2003). The mutual information of university-industry-government relations: An indicator of the Triple Helix dynamics. Scientometrics, 58(2), 445–467.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leydesdorff, L. (2006). The knowledge-based economy: Modeled, measured, simulated. Boca Raton, Florida: Universal-Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Leydesdorff, L. & Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Can “the public” be considered as a fourth Helix in university-industry-government relations?, Science and Public Policy, 30(1), 55–61. http://www.leydesdorff.net/th4/spp.htm.
  21. Morozov, E. (2009). Iran: Downside to the “Twitter revolution.”. Dissent, 56(4), 10–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mungiu-Pippidi, A., & Munteanu, I. (2009). Moldova’s “Twitter revolution”. Journal of Democracy, 20(3), 136–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. National Election Committee. (2009). Overview of general activities conducted by political parties in 2008 and their income and expenditure. Seoul: NEC. (Written in Korean).Google Scholar
  24. National Informatization Society Agency. (2010). A white paper about national informatization. Seoul: NIDA. (Written in Korean).Google Scholar
  25. Park, H. W. (2011). How do social scientists use link data from search engines to understand Internet-based political and electoral communication. Quality & Quantity. doi: 10.1007/s11135-010-9421-x.
  26. Park, H. W., Hong, H. D., & Leydesdorff, L. (2005). A comparison of the knowledge-based innovation systems in the economies of South Korea and the Netherlands using Triple Helix indicators. Scientometrics, 65(1), 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Park, H. W., & Hsu, C. L. (2010). Social hyperlink networks in Web 1.0, Web 2.0, and Twitter: A case of South Korea. A paper presented at the annual conference of International Communication Association, Singapore.Google Scholar
  28. Park, H. W., & Jankowski, N. W. (2008). A hyperlink network analysis of citizen blogs in South Korean politics. Javnost-the Public, 15(2), 57–74.Google Scholar
  29. Park, H. W., Kim, C. S., & Barnett, G. A. (2004). Socio-communicational structural among political actors on the web in South Korea. New Media and Society, 6(3), 403–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Park, H. W., & Kluver, R. (2009). Trends in online networking among South Korean politicians. Government Information Quarterly, 26(3), 505–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Park, H. W., & Leydesdorff, L. (2010). Longitudinal trends in networks of university-industry-government relations in South Korea: The role of programmatic incentives. Research Policy, 39(5), 640–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Park, S. J., Lim, Y. S., Sams, S., Sang, M. N., & Park, H. W. (2011). Networked politics on Cyworld: The text and sentiment of Korean political profiles. Social Science Computer Review, 29(3), 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Park, H. W., & Thelwall, M. (2008). Developing network indicators for ideological landscapes from the political blogosphere in South Korea. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 856–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sagolla, D. (2009). How Twitter was born. Accessed March 5, 2010, http://www.140characters.com/2009/01/30/how-twitter-was-born/.
  35. Savage, M., & Burrows, R. (2007). The coming crisis of empirical sociology. Sociology, 41(5), 885–899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shannon, C. E. (1948). A mathematical theory of communication. The Bell System Technical Journal, 27, 379–423.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. Shannon, C. E., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.MATHGoogle Scholar
  38. Shirky, C. (2009). How social media can make history, TED talk, Accessed February 10, 2010, http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/clay_shirky_how_cellphones_twitter_facebook_can_make_history.html.
  39. Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Tenore, M. J. (2007). Experimenting with Twitter: How newsrooms are using it to reach more users. Accessed 5 March 5, 2010, http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=128918.
  41. Tumasjan, A, Sprenger, T. O., Sandner, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. (2010). Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In Proceedings of the 4th international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  42. Williamson, A., Miller, L., & Fallon, F. (2010). Behind the digital campaign: An exploration of the use, impact and regulation of digital campaigning. Accessed April 24, 2011, http://www.astrid-online.it/Forme-e-st/Studi-ric/HANSARD_Digital-campaign_04_2010.pdf.

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Journalism and Technical CommunicationColorado State UniversityFort CollinsUSA
  2. 2.Department of Media & CommunicationYeungnam UniversityGyeongsan-siSouth Korea
  3. 3.World Class University (WCU) Webometrics Institute and CyberEmotions Research Center, Yeungnam UniversityGyeongsan-siSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations