Campaign Mobilization in the Social Media Era: To what extent are Digital Tools changing the quality and quantity of Party Contacting in Elections?
Lead Research Organisation:
University of Manchester
Department Name: Social Sciences
Abstract
The central objective of this research collaboration is to further our understanding of how the quality, quantity and effects of campaign contacting are changing as a result of the use of social media by parties, candidates and their supporters. Specifically, we advance the argument that online tools are increasing not only the amount of contact that voters receive in elections encouraging them to vote but also its mobilizing effects. We make this claim based on the viral properties of the digital medium and its increasingly socially networked basis which make contact faster, more widespread and more likely to be mediated through friends and family. We investigate these propositions using cutting edge methodologies and a range of existing and new election survey data from the U.S. and UK that measures the incidence of different forms of voter contact in these countries during their most recent national elections. The work is highly significant given the concerns that have been raised over falling rates of voter turnout and attachment to parties and politicians within Western Democracies and the U.S. and UK in particular. Based on our findings we will be able to provide new systematic insights for academics and practitioners into the extent and effectiveness of traditional versus new online forms of voter contacting, and what works best to stimulate political engagement. The comparative element of the research is useful in that it will allow us to also examine whether the context and particularly nature of elections and party system affects the rate and impact of these contacts.
Beyond its substantive significance the project is important in extending the PI's current ESRC funded comparative study of online election campaigns and participation. In particular it brings additional methodological skills and expertise in analysis of U.S. National election study data from the U.S. to the project, allowing the PI and the international CI to work together on a cutting edge paper for publication and a follow up grant application. The practical implications of the work are notable in that it will provide the first systematic comparative insight into the effectiveness of online and offline contacting by parties and candidates' during elections and also demonstrate the extent and value of secondary contacts across informal social networks. This will be of benefit to those working on election campaigners as well as other types of public outreach and communication efforts. Finally, given the strong overlap in the research agenda of the U.S. CI and scholars and students at the Institute for Social Change (ISC) and the Democracy Citizens and Elections Research Network (DCERN) at the University Manchester, the collaboration is expected to yield extensive benefits in terms of providing advice, feedback and the building of links with the CI's joint Research Centre with North Carolina on American Politics (DUNC).
Beyond its substantive significance the project is important in extending the PI's current ESRC funded comparative study of online election campaigns and participation. In particular it brings additional methodological skills and expertise in analysis of U.S. National election study data from the U.S. to the project, allowing the PI and the international CI to work together on a cutting edge paper for publication and a follow up grant application. The practical implications of the work are notable in that it will provide the first systematic comparative insight into the effectiveness of online and offline contacting by parties and candidates' during elections and also demonstrate the extent and value of secondary contacts across informal social networks. This will be of benefit to those working on election campaigners as well as other types of public outreach and communication efforts. Finally, given the strong overlap in the research agenda of the U.S. CI and scholars and students at the Institute for Social Change (ISC) and the Democracy Citizens and Elections Research Network (DCERN) at the University Manchester, the collaboration is expected to yield extensive benefits in terms of providing advice, feedback and the building of links with the CI's joint Research Centre with North Carolina on American Politics (DUNC).
Planned Impact
This research will be of benefit to a wide range of non-academic audiences. Following the pioneering work by Gerber and Green (2000) in the U.S. in assessing the cost of individual contact per vote returned we will be able to measure the comparative benefits of traditional forms of contact versus newer web and mobile phone-based applications. By adding the UK to the analysis we will be able to assess the extent to which different techniques are more suitable and relevant to different institutional settings. Finally, by dividing both offline and online contact into more formal approaches from the party directly and informal approaches by friends and family in support of an individual candidate the research will provide important insight into the extent to campaigns benefit from employing a more non-intrusive 'bottom-up' networked strategy to spread their message, rather than a top-down more orchestrated system of message delivery.
These findings will be delivered in a research paper that will be presented at an international workshop (organized as part of this project) on campaign mobilization in late 2013. This workshop will bring together academics and practitioners in the field. The key findings will be written up as a short report to be disseminated by Duke and Manchester University Press Offices, the PI and CI project websites and the user networks established during the ESRC Fellowships.
Key non-academic beneficiaries of the project and those targeted with the report are outlined below (more specific details and examples of organizations/groups/agencies involved are provided in the Pathways to Impact document):
(1) Parties, Unions and Non-profit organizations - particularly those involved in election or issue campaigns within these groups.
(2) Campaign professionals - private consultants and commercial firms seeking to advise political organizations, candidates and those campaigning for changes in the social or economic arena. The research will provide rigorous cutting edge research on the best tools to exploit in the bid to capture public attention for one's cause.
(3) A wider body of less organized individual activists outside parties and formal bodies that are interested in understanding how digital technologies can and are being used to enact political change both in the UK and elsewhere such as NetRoots.
(4) Media and Independent/Private research organisations - the findings would be of interest to political journalists in the mainstream news media in both the US and UK as well as specialist publications for political campaigners and legislative/political staff. In addition, the findings would be of interest to independent research bodies dedicated to researching changes in democratic practice, reform and e-democracy issues such as the Hansard Society as well as Thinktanks conducting work in this area.
(5) Policy officials - Staff within national, state and local government departments, agencies and committees seeking to engage in public education programmes or those seeking to examine how falling rates of voter turnout and citizen engagement can be addressed .
More generally the research has the potential to contribute to democratic culture and society by identifying how the parties and other organizations can engage the public in politics and stimulate interest in elections. With concerns emerging since the UK election of 2001 about falling turnout rates and declines observed the past decades in the U.S., particularly among young people, these findings will be of particular importance to those who see electoral participation as an important stepping stone onto other forms of engagement.
These findings will be delivered in a research paper that will be presented at an international workshop (organized as part of this project) on campaign mobilization in late 2013. This workshop will bring together academics and practitioners in the field. The key findings will be written up as a short report to be disseminated by Duke and Manchester University Press Offices, the PI and CI project websites and the user networks established during the ESRC Fellowships.
Key non-academic beneficiaries of the project and those targeted with the report are outlined below (more specific details and examples of organizations/groups/agencies involved are provided in the Pathways to Impact document):
(1) Parties, Unions and Non-profit organizations - particularly those involved in election or issue campaigns within these groups.
(2) Campaign professionals - private consultants and commercial firms seeking to advise political organizations, candidates and those campaigning for changes in the social or economic arena. The research will provide rigorous cutting edge research on the best tools to exploit in the bid to capture public attention for one's cause.
(3) A wider body of less organized individual activists outside parties and formal bodies that are interested in understanding how digital technologies can and are being used to enact political change both in the UK and elsewhere such as NetRoots.
(4) Media and Independent/Private research organisations - the findings would be of interest to political journalists in the mainstream news media in both the US and UK as well as specialist publications for political campaigners and legislative/political staff. In addition, the findings would be of interest to independent research bodies dedicated to researching changes in democratic practice, reform and e-democracy issues such as the Hansard Society as well as Thinktanks conducting work in this area.
(5) Policy officials - Staff within national, state and local government departments, agencies and committees seeking to engage in public education programmes or those seeking to examine how falling rates of voter turnout and citizen engagement can be addressed .
More generally the research has the potential to contribute to democratic culture and society by identifying how the parties and other organizations can engage the public in politics and stimulate interest in elections. With concerns emerging since the UK election of 2001 about falling turnout rates and declines observed the past decades in the U.S., particularly among young people, these findings will be of particular importance to those who see electoral participation as an important stepping stone onto other forms of engagement.
People |
ORCID iD |
Rachel Gibson (Principal Investigator) | |
John Aldrich (Co-Investigator) |
Publications
Aldrich J
(2015)
Getting out the vote in the social media era Are digital tools changing the extent, nature and impact of party contacting in elections?
in Party Politics
Aldrich, J.
(2016)
Party Politics Special Issue 'Voter Mobilization in Context'
Gibson R
(2016)
Voter mobilisation in context Special issue editors' introduction
in Party Politics
Gibson, R
Online Election Campaigning: How effective are social media tools in getting out the vote?
in Sociology Review
Gibson, R.
Web Campaigning Across Space
Magalhaes, P
(2017)
The Changing Nature of Campaigning in the Digital Age
Description | The key findings of the project are five-fold: First we confirm across two independent electoral contexts that personalized face to face contacting of voters by parties remains the 'gold standard' in terms of mobilizing turnout on election day. Second, we show that despite the increased attention given to online campaigning in both the UK and U.S. it has no effect on turnout. This holds true whether contact comes directly from the party or indirectly i.e. it is mediated through online social networks. This latter finding is significant in that it counters the widely publicised findings of a so-called 'Facebook effect' on turnout reported in Nature using experimental methods. Third, beyond turnout, there is evidence from our results to suggest that online contact may be a way for campaigns to maintain engagement among their activists. Fourth, our study shows there has been a slight fall in rates of overall contacting in the U.S. and UK over the past decade, particularly of more personalized forms. Given that this has occurred during the period where campaigns have switched to use more online tools, this indicates e-campaigning may be becoming a substitute for traditional methods. Finally, despite the fall in use of more traditional methods, our results show that U.S. parties are much more likely to engage in direct online contacting than their UK counterparts. Levels of indirect online contact, i.e. political messages from friends and family about one's vote however are similar across the two countries. This discrepancy is very interesting in that it confirms that British parties lag behind their American counterparts in the use of web campaigning, but that the public at large are just as comfortable to use the new tools to interact about politics during the election. These findings suggest that there is a need for further analysis of the levels and impact of online contacting on turnout and other types of campaign activity in countries outside of the two cases examined here in order to assess whether they apply across different institutional contexts. We will undertake this analysis in a paper now accepted for presentation at the 2014 American Political Science Association Meeting (APSA). We will examine the same questions in at least 10 other countries that have conducted the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES) module of questions on which our analysis is based and use multi-level modelling techniques to analyse the data. |
Exploitation Route | The findings from the research are useful to political parties and candidates in the U.S. and UK particularly in that they show that contacting voters through personal i.e. face to face methods remains the most important way to ensure they vote. Use of digital channels do not appear to be particularly helpful in this regard. That said, the use of web campaigning appears to be important in sustaining levels of involvement of activists and ensuring existing volunteers and members are kept involved. Also while online methods of contact may not be effective on their own, an investment by campaigners in understanding how they can be used to increase and support better offline contacting would seem to be a worthwhile step. In particular, this suggests the merits of a two-step approach to voter mobilization and disseminating the campaign message whereby digital communication and resources are used to support activists who then go on and engage in wider personalized canvassing. The findings are also of strategic value for campaigners in political organizations more generally, i.e. third sector groups and community campaigners seeking to engage more people in a cause or issue. Based on our findings a clear recommendation is that such groups would do well to focus on how to use digital channels to support and extend their face to face and personalized forms of contacting. Online contact may be quicker and cheaper but at least based on current trends is not particularly effective. |
Sectors | Government, Democracy and Justice |
Description | Results were disseminated at the 2013 American Political Science Association's annual meeting in a very well attended panel that provided a retrospective evaluation of the 2012 Presidential election and included eminent scholars of U.S. politics. Key findings were also presented in a paper presented at a specialist academic workshop organized by the PIs in Manchester. Other international experts in the study of voter mobilization presented papers (Green, Hansen, Schmitt-Beck, Panogopoulos, Pattie, Fisher), and we developed a proposal for a special issue of Party Politics on 'Voter Mobilization in Context' which has been accepted. The papers including our own are currently under review with publication likely in 2015. Publishing our work in this special issue will maximize its scientific impact given the established reputation of the contributors. Results from the study were presented by Prof Gibson to the public at the Scottish Parliament's 2013 Festival of Politics where she joined a panel of media and campaign experts discussing the value of social media (this included Michael White of the Guardian). Findings have been publicised through blog posts for the Democratic Audit run by the LSE Public Policy Group and University of Manchester's 'Westminster Watch', and a report for the current ESRC Britain in 2014 magazine. This publication resulted in email correspondence with an MP to find out further information about the study and its implications for the upcoming General Election. Key findings have also been disseminated to in the Sociology Review (Issue 4, 2015) a publication that is popular in the teaching of A level students. In 2015 the PI was invited and gave presentation to the 'Chalk & Talk' series of lunchtime talks run by the Social Market Foundation. The talk was well attended and the results generated significant discussion. The Head of Campaigns at Shelter requested a copy of the slides. |
First Year Of Impact | 2013 |
Sector | Education |
Impact Types | Policy & public services |
Description | Blog post |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Media (as a channel to the public) |
Results and Impact | Not known |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
URL | http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=1740 |
Description | Blog post |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | Led to discussion within research group of further ways to promote findings Not known |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
URL | http://blog.policy.manchester.ac.uk/featured/2013/10/how-effective-is-social-media-in-getting-people... |
Description | International Workshop on Voter Mobilization in Context |
Form Of Engagement Activity | Participation in an activity, workshop or similar |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | International |
Primary Audience | Other academic audiences (collaborators, peers etc.) |
Results and Impact | This international workshop is part of a project conducted by Prof Rachel Gibson (University of Manchester) and Prof John Aldrich (Duke University) examining the effects of online and offline contacting on citizen engagement in elections. The workshop is designed to examine over time trends in voter mobilization within and across countries and at both its drivers and effects. Presentations will address questions related to both formal (i.e. party) efforts and contact and that coming from informal networks, with a particular focus on the role of social media. This project is funded by the UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC). The work has led to a special issue of Party Politics which will be published in 2015. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
Description | Presentation at Social Market Foundation 'Chalk and Talk' Series |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | The presentation produced an extensive discussion and a very interesting question and answer session. Several practitioners were in the audience and there was a useful evaluation of online campaigning and the strengths and weaknesses of using digital methods to contact voters. Campaign Manager from Shelter requested my slides and an academic colleague from the University of Surrey who came specifically to hear the talk then met with me afterward to arrange a Post election digital campaign roundtable. The goal is to develop a forum that brings academics and e-campaigners and journalists together to discuss the impact of social media and other web tools on the election. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2015 |
URL | http://www.smf.co.uk/events/chalk-talk-with-rachel-gibson-digital-campaigning-where-is-it-happening-... |
Description | Publication of findings in 'Sociological Review' a resource for A level social sciences students |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Schools |
Results and Impact | Sociological Review is a magazine for Schools that includes short articles (2k words) written by social scientists to communicate their research. My article dealt with the question of whether online campaigning has an effect on voter mobilization and whether the UK is keeping pace with other countries such as the U.S. in terms of its use of digital techniques in elections. Publication due in 2015. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |
Description | School Visit (Stonyhurst, Lancashire) |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A talk or presentation |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | Local |
Primary Audience | Schools |
Results and Impact | A talk to 6th Form Politics Students at Stonyhurst College about the U.S. election and the importance of Social Media campaigning. |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2017 |
Description | Short article in ESRC Magazine Society Now |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | Article further disseminated research findings from project Not known |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2013 |
URL | http://www.esrc.ac.uk/_images/Society_Now_17_tcm8-28768.pdf |
Description | Short article on 'How effective are social media tools in getting out the vote?' in ESRC's Britain in 2013 |
Form Of Engagement Activity | A magazine, newsletter or online publication |
Part Of Official Scheme? | No |
Geographic Reach | National |
Primary Audience | Public/other audiences |
Results and Impact | Article read by consumers of Britain in 2013 published annually by ESRC Not known |
Year(s) Of Engagement Activity | 2014 |