1,720,971 research outputs found
Social news use & citizen participation
No full textNews use has been consistently and closely linked to an active citizenry. In the last decade, social media has rapidly emerged as a means for one to not just consume but reproduce and disseminate news-related content. This trend is particularly more prevalent among young adults. Accordingly, it is important to better understand what factors may influence different news-related activities on social media – or what this research refers to as social news use – and how this in turns affects citizen participation. The three research objectives of the present research are as follows: 1) to explore how media and individual factors affect millennials’ engagement in social news use, 2) to understand how civically or politically engaged millennials engage with social media as sources of news and information, and 3) to examine how social new use facilitates or inhibits citizen participation. To achieve the research objectives, a conceptual model was proposed on the basis of uses & gratifications theory, social presence theory, processes in self-presentation and information control, and the O-S-R-O-R model. In particular, the entire research is divided into two interrelated studies. In the first study, one-on-one survey data was collected in Singapore from eligible voters under the age of 36 years old and have had some prior experience with social news use. Hierarchical regression showed how each dimension of social news use was predicted by a varied pattern of motivations, information controls and social presence. Further, mediation analyses revealed that certain communicative and cognition factors (i.e. interpersonal discussion, efficacy, and news production) channel the effects of social news use on citizen participation. To complement the data collected in the first study, Study 2 relied on qualitative data derived from ii in-depth interviews with Singaporean millennial activists. The findings in this phase clarified some of the findings/relationships found in the earlier study (e.g. entertainment motivation and news participation) and elucidated current social news use practices beyond consumption. Moreover, the interview material also revealed some of the shortcomings of social news use, particularly with regards to citizen participation. Collectively, this research not only showed that social news use is a multi-dimensional activity driven by both individual and media factors, but also not all forms of news engagement are necessarily in equal in terms of deliberation and mobilizing effects. For researchers, the present research provides a theoretical framework advancing the understanding of the antecedents, characteristics, and outcomes of social news use. In addition, the project as a whole contributed to the current discourse on the effects of social news use by producing research out of a Western liberal-democratic context. For social media providers, practitioners in the media industry, and policy makers, the findings shed light on how to increase engagement on these platforms to suit their respective goals
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Digital Journalism (Studies):Defining the Field
Get PDFThis book brings together a collection of articles published in a Digital Journalism special issue in 2019 titled “Digital Journalism (Studies) - Defining the Field”, edited by the four of us in our capacity as the Digital Journalism Editorial Team. We had three ambitions with this special issue (c.f. Eldridge, Hess, Tandoc, & Westlund, 2019)First, to offer a review of research that has been published in this journal since its launch in 2013 to examine the current state of play. We commissioned a review article by a team of scholars with expertise with such reviews (Steensen, Larsen, Hågvar & Fonn, 2019). Second, we wanted to launch a new article format for the journal – the invited conceptual article (Westlund, 2018), and commissioned five articles to conceptualize ‘digital journalism’ from different research foci (Burgess & Hurcombe, 2019; Duffy & Peng Hwa, 2019; Robinson, Carlson & Lewis, 2019; Zelizer, 2019; Waisbord, 2019). Third, building on these articles, we authored an analysis of the breadth of discussions which have shaped the field of Digital Journalism Studies, outlined our vision of this field, and established the editorial agenda of Digital Journalism going forward guided by the Digital Journalism Studies Compass we introduced. In line with our vision for the journal and the rigorous work being developed in the field, all articles in this special issue were rigorously peer-reviewed by experts in the field. This book republishes the articles from the special issue in the original order and shape
Digital Journalism (Studies):Defining the Field
No full textThis book brings together a collection of articles published in a Digital Journalism special issue in 2019 titled “Digital Journalism (Studies) - Defining the Field”, edited by the four of us in our capacity as the Digital Journalism Editorial Team. We had three ambitions with this special issue (c.f. Eldridge, Hess, Tandoc, & Westlund, 2019)First, to offer a review of research that has been published in this journal since its launch in 2013 to examine the current state of play. We commissioned a review article by a team of scholars with expertise with such reviews (Steensen, Larsen, Hågvar & Fonn, 2019). Second, we wanted to launch a new article format for the journal – the invited conceptual article (Westlund, 2018), and commissioned five articles to conceptualize ‘digital journalism’ from different research foci (Burgess & Hurcombe, 2019; Duffy & Peng Hwa, 2019; Robinson, Carlson & Lewis, 2019; Zelizer, 2019; Waisbord, 2019). Third, building on these articles, we authored an analysis of the breadth of discussions which have shaped the field of Digital Journalism Studies, outlined our vision of this field, and established the editorial agenda of Digital Journalism going forward guided by the Digital Journalism Studies Compass we introduced. In line with our vision for the journal and the rigorous work being developed in the field, all articles in this special issue were rigorously peer-reviewed by experts in the field. This book republishes the articles from the special issue in the original order and shape
Digital Journalism (Studies):Defining the Field
Get PDFThis book brings together a collection of articles published in a Digital Journalism special issue in 2019 titled “Digital Journalism (Studies) - Defining the Field”, edited by the four of us in our capacity as the Digital Journalism Editorial Team. We had three ambitions with this special issue (c.f. Eldridge, Hess, Tandoc, & Westlund, 2019)First, to offer a review of research that has been published in this journal since its launch in 2013 to examine the current state of play. We commissioned a review article by a team of scholars with expertise with such reviews (Steensen, Larsen, Hågvar & Fonn, 2019). Second, we wanted to launch a new article format for the journal – the invited conceptual article (Westlund, 2018), and commissioned five articles to conceptualize ‘digital journalism’ from different research foci (Burgess & Hurcombe, 2019; Duffy & Peng Hwa, 2019; Robinson, Carlson & Lewis, 2019; Zelizer, 2019; Waisbord, 2019). Third, building on these articles, we authored an analysis of the breadth of discussions which have shaped the field of Digital Journalism Studies, outlined our vision of this field, and established the editorial agenda of Digital Journalism going forward guided by the Digital Journalism Studies Compass we introduced. In line with our vision for the journal and the rigorous work being developed in the field, all articles in this special issue were rigorously peer-reviewed by experts in the field. This book republishes the articles from the special issue in the original order and shape
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Digital Journalism (Studies):Defining the Field
Get PDFThis book brings together a collection of articles published in a Digital Journalism special issue in 2019 titled “Digital Journalism (Studies) - Defining the Field”, edited by the four of us in our capacity as the Digital Journalism Editorial Team. We had three ambitions with this special issue (c.f. Eldridge, Hess, Tandoc, & Westlund, 2019)First, to offer a review of research that has been published in this journal since its launch in 2013 to examine the current state of play. We commissioned a review article by a team of scholars with expertise with such reviews (Steensen, Larsen, Hågvar & Fonn, 2019). Second, we wanted to launch a new article format for the journal – the invited conceptual article (Westlund, 2018), and commissioned five articles to conceptualize ‘digital journalism’ from different research foci (Burgess & Hurcombe, 2019; Duffy & Peng Hwa, 2019; Robinson, Carlson & Lewis, 2019; Zelizer, 2019; Waisbord, 2019). Third, building on these articles, we authored an analysis of the breadth of discussions which have shaped the field of Digital Journalism Studies, outlined our vision of this field, and established the editorial agenda of Digital Journalism going forward guided by the Digital Journalism Studies Compass we introduced. In line with our vision for the journal and the rigorous work being developed in the field, all articles in this special issue were rigorously peer-reviewed by experts in the field. This book republishes the articles from the special issue in the original order and shape
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Journalism at the Periphery
Get PDFThe increasing influence of actors who might not fit into traditional definitions of a journalist but are taking part in processes that produce journalism has attracted scholarly attention. They have been called interlopers, strangers, new entrants, peripheral, and emergent actors, among others. As journalism scholars grapple with how to refer to these actors, it is important to reflect on the assumptions that underlie emerging labels. These include: 1) what journalistic tasks are involved; 2) how and why these journalistic tasks are performed; 3) who is making the definition; and 4) where and when these actors are located. However, journalism being the centre of our investigation should not automatically assume that it is at the centre of social life. So, it might also be that for the technological field, journalism is at the periphery; that for these technology-oriented actors whose influence across fields is increasing, journalists and what they do are at the periphery. For a field that supposedly plays an important role in public life, this has important implications
- …
