Political Participation in the Form of Online Petitions: A Comparison of Formal and Informal Petitioning

Janne Berg
{"title":"Political Participation in the Form of Online Petitions: A Comparison of Formal and Informal Petitioning","authors":"Janne Berg","doi":"10.4018/IJEP.2017010102","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper contributes to the field of e-participation by studying e-petitioning on both formal and informal petition bodies. The aim is to contribute to the understanding of the features of formal and informal e-petition platforms as well as the characteristics of the e-petitions. A formal kansalaisaloite.fi and an informal e-petition platform adressit.com in Finland were compared using quantitative content analysis. By examining the differences between formal and informal platforms, this paper sheds light over citizens' political behavior in the form of online petitioning. The varying formality of the platforms was reflected in their features and e-petitioning processes. Furthermore, formal and informal e-petitions differed regarding their initiators, text length, topics, preparation quality, rationality, affectivity and connections to other types of media. E-petitions on the formal platform are better prepared, show more signs of rational argumentation, and more often concern controversial topics.","PeriodicalId":13695,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. E Politics","volume":"205 1","pages":"14-29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. E Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4018/IJEP.2017010102","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

This paper contributes to the field of e-participation by studying e-petitioning on both formal and informal petition bodies. The aim is to contribute to the understanding of the features of formal and informal e-petition platforms as well as the characteristics of the e-petitions. A formal kansalaisaloite.fi and an informal e-petition platform adressit.com in Finland were compared using quantitative content analysis. By examining the differences between formal and informal platforms, this paper sheds light over citizens' political behavior in the form of online petitioning. The varying formality of the platforms was reflected in their features and e-petitioning processes. Furthermore, formal and informal e-petitions differed regarding their initiators, text length, topics, preparation quality, rationality, affectivity and connections to other types of media. E-petitions on the formal platform are better prepared, show more signs of rational argumentation, and more often concern controversial topics.
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
网络信访形式下的政治参与:正式信访与非正式信访之比较
本文通过研究正式和非正式请愿机构的电子请愿,为电子参与领域做出了贡献。其目的是有助于理解正式和非正式电子请愿平台的特点以及电子请愿的特点。正式的堪萨斯贵族。fi和芬兰的非正式电子请愿平台addressit.com使用定量内容分析进行了比较。本文通过考察正式与非正式平台的差异,揭示了公民在网络上访形式下的政治行为。这些平台的不同形式反映在它们的特征和电子请愿过程中。此外,正式和非正式的电子请愿在发起者、文本长度、主题、准备质量、合理性、情感和与其他类型媒体的联系方面存在差异。正式平台上的电子请愿准备得更好,更有理性论证的迹象,而且更多地关注有争议的话题。
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
Theorizing the Journalism Model of Disinformation and Hate Speech Propagation in a Nigerian Democratic Context Farming on Facebook, Camera-less Food Photography and a New Indian Pastoral A Possible Framework for Attention-Based Politics: A Field for Research The Potential of Interactive Negotiated Narratives in Rebuilding and Reimagining Northern Irish Society Citizen Engagement and Social Media: The Case of Mexican Presidential Candidacies
×
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