Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/72658Full metadata record
| ???org.dspace.app.webui.jsptag.ItemTag.dcfield??? | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.advisor | 江淳芳(Chun-Fang Chiang) | |
| dc.contributor.author | Yi-Wen Chen | en |
| dc.contributor.author | 陳羿妏 | zh_TW |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2021-06-17T07:02:57Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2029-07-30 | |
| dc.date.copyright | 2019-08-05 | |
| dc.date.issued | 2019 | |
| dc.date.submitted | 2019-07-30 | |
| dc.identifier.citation | Abbe, Owen G, Jay Goodliffe, Paul S Herrnson, and Kelly D Patterson. 2003. “Agenda setting in congressional elections: The impact of issues and campaigns on voting behavior.” Political Research Quarterly 56(4): 419–430.
Abramowitz, Alan, and Jennifer McCoy. 2019. “United States: Racial Resentment, Negative Partisanship, and Polarization in Trump’s America.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 681(1): 137–156. Bakshy, Eytan, Solomon Messing, and Lada A Adamic. 2015. “Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook.” Science 348(6239): 1130–1132. Barberá, Pablo, and Gonzalo Rivero. 2015. “Understanding the political representativeness of Twitter users.” Social Science Computer Review 33(6): 712–729. Bekafigo, Marija Anna, and Allan McBride. 2013. “Who tweets about politics Political participation of Twitter users during the 2011gubernatorial elections.” Social Science Computer Review 31(5): 625–643. Bode, Leticia. 2012. “Facebooking it to the polls: A study in online social networking and political behavior.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics 9(4): 352–369. Bode, Leticia, Emily K Vraga, Porismita Borah, and Dhavan V Shah. 2014. “A new space for political behavior: Political social networking and its democratic consequences.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19(3): 414–429. Bollen, Johan, Huina Mao, and Alberto Pepe. 2011. “Modeling public mood and emotion: Twitter sentiment and socio-economic phenomena.” In Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Bond, Robert, and Solomon Messing. 2015. “Quantifying social media’s political space: Estimating ideology from publicly revealed preferences on Facebook.” American Political Science Review 109(1): 62–78. Chan, Jason, Anindya Ghose, and Robert Seamans. 2016. “The internet and racial hate crime: Offline spillovers from online access.” MIS Quarterly 40(2): 381–403. Cohen-Almagor, Raphael. 2018. “Taking North American white supremacist groups seriously: The scope and the challenge of hate speech on the Internet.” International journal of crime, justice, and social democracy 7(2): 38–57. Conover, Michael D, Jacob Ratkiewicz, Matthew Francisco, Bruno Gonçalves, Filippo Menczer, and Alessandro Flammini. 2011. “Political polarization on twitter.” In Fifth interational AAAI conference on weblogs and social media. Dharmapala, Dhammika, and Richard H McAdams. 2005. “Words that kill? An economic model of the influence of speech on behavior (with particular reference to hate speech).” The Journal of Legal Studies 34(1): 93–136. Flores, René D. 2018. “Can elites shape public attitudes toward immigrants?: Evidence from the 2016 US presidential election.” Social Forces 96(4): 1649–1690. Garimella, Venkata Rama Kiran, and Ingmar Weber. 2017. “A long-term analysis of polarization on Twitter.” In Eleventh International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media. Gentzkow, Matthew, and Jesse M Shapiro. 2011. “Ideological segregation online and offline.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics 126(4): 1799–1839. Gruzd, Anatoliy, and Jeffrey Roy. 2014. “Investigating political polarization on Twitter: A Canadian perspective.” Policy & Internet 6(1): 28–45. Halberstam, Yosh, and Brian Knight. 2016. “Homophily, group size, and the diffusion of political information in social networks: Evidence from Twitter.” Journal of Public Economics 143: 73–88. Hansen, Kasper M, and Karina Kosiara-Pedersen. 2017. “How campaigns polarize the electorate: Political polarization as an effect of the minimal effect theory within a multi-party system.” Party Politics 23(3): 181–192. Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2015. “Information, inequality, and mass polarization: ideology in advanced democracies.” Comparative Political Studies 48(13): 1781–1813. Jacobson, Gary C. 2016. “Polarization, gridlock, and presidential campaign politics in 2016.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 667(1): 226–246. Kim, Yoon. 2014. “Convolutional neural networks for sentence classification.” arXiv preprint arXiv:1408.5882. Kiousis, Spiro, Michael Mitrook, Xu Wu, and Trent Seltzer. 2006. “First- and Second-Level Agenda-Building and Agenda-Setting Effects: Exploring the Linkages Among Candidate News Releases, Media Coverage, and Public Opinion During the 2002 Florida Gubernatorial Election.” Journal of Public Relations Research 18(3): 265–285. Krueger, Alan B, and Jitka Malečková. 2003. “Education, poverty and terrorism: Is there a causal connection?” Journal of Economic perspectives 17(4): 119–144. Kushin, Matthew James, and Masahiro Yamamoto. 2013. “Did social media really matter? College students’use of online media and political decision making in the 2008 election.” In New Media, Campaigning and the 2008 Facebook Election.: Routledge, : 63–86. O’Connor, Brendan, Ramnath Balasubramanyan, Bryan R Routledge, and Noah A Smith. 2010. “From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series.” In Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Roberts, Marilyn S. 1992. “Predicting voting behavior via the agenda-setting tradition.” Journalism Quarterly 69(4): 878–892. Schaffner, Brian F, Matthew MacWilliams, and Tatishe Nteta. 2016. “Explaining white polarization in the 2016 vote for president: The sobering role of racism and sexism.” In Conference on the US Elections of.: 8–9. Sheafer, Tamir, and Gabriel Weimann. 2005. “Agenda building, agenda setting, priming, individual voting intentions, and the aggregate results: An analysis of four Israeli elections.” Journal of Communication 55(2): 347–365. Walgrave, Stefaan, Stuart Soroka, and Michiel Nuytemans. 2008. “The mass media’s political agenda-setting power: A longitudinal analysis of media, parliament, and government in Belgium (1993 to 2000).” Comparative Political Studies 41(6): 814–836. | |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/72658 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | Facebook 及推特等社群軟體的崛起，讓社群媒體上的政治行為備受重視。本文則聚焦在2016美國總統大選中，Facebook上的政治極化現象與川普對於公眾輿論及議題設定的影響。本文使用Facebook上的使用者按讚資料，建立不同的意識形態極化指標來觀察Facebook上的政治極化程度，並進一步結合FBI的仇恨犯罪資料，探索對網路上的極化現象與現實世界中的犯罪行為間的關聯。此外，本文也試圖從Facebook資料中挖掘川普對於公眾輿論，特別是種族與移民議題上影響的證據。本文發現，Facebook上的政治極化程度確實隨著競選過程而提高，同時與仇恨犯罪行為間存在正相關。另外，資料顯示川普對於移民與種族議題的言論對於媒體的議題選擇造成部分影響，同時我們也發現保守派與自由派間對於相關議題的獲取行為存在差異，特別是在移民議題上。然而，沒有證據顯示川普在移民及種族議題上對閱聽者的態度及議題偏好有所影響。 | zh_TW |
| dc.description.abstract | Since social media platform such as Facebook and Twitter became popular among the world, the political behavior on social media has become a great interest of scholars. In this paper, we are interested in the level of political polarization and Trump's impact on public opinion and agenda setting on Facebook during 2016 U.S presidential campaign. We propose different indexes to observe the level of political polarization among users using an user-like data. In addition, combing with hate crime data from FBI, we explore the relationship between online polarization and offline hate crime behavior. We also seek for some evidence to show the impact of Donald Trump on public opinion toward immigration and racial issues on Facebook from our data. We find that the polarization level on Facebook did increase during the presidential campaign, with a positive correlation with hate crime numbers. Moreover, the data suggest that there are some impact of Trump on agenda building, and a polarization in attitudes toward our interested issues between conservatives and liberals, especially on immigration issues. However, there are no evidence showing that Trump has an impact on public attitude and first-level agenda setting. | en |
| dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2021-06-17T07:02:57Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 ntu-108-R05322021-1.pdf: 3607833 bytes, checksum: a6ba52574f09aab4598a46c01de07990 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2019 | en |
| dc.description.tableofcontents | 1 Introduction 1
2 Literature Review 3 2.1 The Role of Social Media in Political Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2 Agenda Setting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.3 Political Polarization and Ideological Segregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.4 Trump’s influence on public opinion and mass polarization . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.5 Motivation of Hate Crimes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3 Ideological Segregation on Social Media 6 3.1 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2 Ideology Estimation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.1 Using Dimension Reduction to Estimate Ideology Score . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2.2 Ideological Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3 Political Polarization on Social Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3.1 Polarization Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.3.2 Polarization Index in State-Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3.4 Tracking Trump and Clinton’s Fans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.4.1 Users liking Trump and Clinton’s Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.4.2 Ideological Polarization between Candidates’ Followers . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.4.3 Far-Right/Left Politics Following Trump and Clinton . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3.5 Ideological Segregation on Fan Pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.5.1 Gentzkow and Shapiro’s Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.5.2 Segregation on Trump and Clinton’s Fan Pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4 Interaction between Online and Offline Behavior: Hate Crime Analysis 20 4.1 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.1.1 Data Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.1.2 Summary Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.2 Online Political Polarization and Hate Crime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.2.1 Regression Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.2.2 Alternative Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4.2.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4.3 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 5 Agenda Setting and Public Opinion on Social Media 34 5.1 Identification of Issue-Related Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.1.1 Data Pre-processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 5.1.2 Classification Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 5.2 Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5.2.1 Media Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 5.2.2 Supply Side of Information: Pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 5.2.3 Demand Side of Information: Users’ Likes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 5.2.4 Demand Side of Information: Presidential Candidates’ Followers . . . . . 47 5.2.5 Demand Side of Information: Users’ Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 5.2.6 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 6 Conclusion 54 References 56 A Hate Crime Regression 59 B 64 B.1 Ideological Polarization on Immigration/Race Related Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 B.2 Extreme Users Liking Immigration/Race Related Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 B.3 Extreme Users Commenting Immigration/Race Related Posts . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 | |
| dc.language.iso | en | |
| dc.title | 2016美國總統大選中的政治極化與輿情分析：以臉書資料為例 | zh_TW |
| dc.title | Political Polarization and Public Opinion on Facebook in 2016 US Presidential Election | en |
| dc.type | Thesis | |
| dc.date.schoolyear | 107-2 | |
| dc.description.degree | 碩士 | |
| dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 林明仁(Ming-Jen Lin),謝吉隆(Ji-Lung Hsieh) | |
| dc.subject.keyword | 政治極化,公眾輿情,社群媒體,仇恨犯罪,川普, | zh_TW |
| dc.subject.keyword | Political Polarization,Public opinion,Social media,Hate crime,Donald Trump, | en |
| dc.relation.page | 67 | |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU201901989 | |
| dc.rights.note | 有償授權 | |
| dc.date.accepted | 2019-07-30 | |
| dc.contributor.author-college | 社會科學院 | zh_TW |
| dc.contributor.author-dept | 經濟學研究所 | zh_TW |
| Appears in Collections: | 經濟學系 | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ntu-108-1.pdf Restricted Access | 3.52 MB | Adobe PDF |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.