Conceptualizing the Impact of Digital Interference in Elections: A Framework and Agenda for Future Research

Nahema Marchal
{"title":"Conceptualizing the Impact of Digital Interference in Elections: A Framework and Agenda for Future Research","authors":"Nahema Marchal","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3536281","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Concerns over digital interference in elections are widespread. Yet evidence of its impact is still thin and fragmented. How do malicious uses of social media shape, transform, and distort democratic processes? And how should we characterize this impact? Existing research into the effects of social media manipulation has largely focused on measuring its purported impact on opinion swings and voting behavior. Though laudable, this focus might be too reductive. Drawing on normative theories of liberal democracy, this paper argues that the threat of digital interference techniques lies beyond their capacity to change individuals’ political viewpoints and demonstrates how social media manipulation may undermine popular perceptions of electoral integrity, with potentially far-reaching consequences for public trust. Following this assessment, a preliminary research agenda is formulated, highlighting previously overlooked relationships that can be explored to better understand how malicious uses of social media might shape such attitudes and to what effect.","PeriodicalId":170831,"journal":{"name":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Choice: Analysis of Collective Decision-Making eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3536281","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Concerns over digital interference in elections are widespread. Yet evidence of its impact is still thin and fragmented. How do malicious uses of social media shape, transform, and distort democratic processes? And how should we characterize this impact? Existing research into the effects of social media manipulation has largely focused on measuring its purported impact on opinion swings and voting behavior. Though laudable, this focus might be too reductive. Drawing on normative theories of liberal democracy, this paper argues that the threat of digital interference techniques lies beyond their capacity to change individuals’ political viewpoints and demonstrates how social media manipulation may undermine popular perceptions of electoral integrity, with potentially far-reaching consequences for public trust. Following this assessment, a preliminary research agenda is formulated, highlighting previously overlooked relationships that can be explored to better understand how malicious uses of social media might shape such attitudes and to what effect.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
概念化数字干预选举的影响:未来研究的框架和议程
对数字干预选举的担忧普遍存在。然而,有关其影响的证据仍然薄弱且支离破碎。恶意使用社交媒体是如何塑造、改变和扭曲民主进程的?我们应该如何描述这种影响?对社交媒体操纵影响的现有研究主要集中在衡量其对民意波动和投票行为的所谓影响上。虽然值得称赞,但这种关注可能过于简化了。借鉴自由民主的规范理论,本文认为,数字干扰技术的威胁超出了它们改变个人政治观点的能力,并展示了社交媒体操纵如何破坏公众对选举完整性的看法,对公众信任产生潜在的深远影响。在此评估之后,制定了初步研究议程,突出了以前被忽视的关系,可以更好地了解恶意使用社交媒体如何塑造这种态度以及产生什么影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Violent Conflict and the Strength of Civil Society A Model of Embedded Autonomy and Asymmetric Information Endogenous Networks and Legislative Activity Judicial Independence: Why Does De Facto Diverge from De Jure? Does Ethnic Diversity Always Undermine Pro-Social Behavior? Evidence from a Laboratory Experiment
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1