• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

社会影响与政治动员:来自2012年美国总统大选一项随机试验的进一步证据

Social influence and political mobilization: Further evidence from a randomized experiment in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.

作者信息

Jones Jason J, Bond Robert M, Bakshy Eytan, Eckles Dean, Fowler James H

机构信息

Department of Sociology, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, United States of America.

Institute for Advanced Computational Science, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, New York, United States of America.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2017 Apr 26;12(4):e0173851. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173851. eCollection 2017.

DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0173851
PMID:28445476
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5405916/
Abstract

A large-scale experiment during the 2010 U.S. Congressional Election demonstrated a positive effect of an online get-out-the-vote message on real world voting behavior. Here, we report results from a replication of the experiment conducted during the U.S. Presidential Election in 2012. In spite of the fact that get-out-the-vote messages typically yield smaller effects during high-stakes elections due to saturation of mobilization efforts from many sources, a significant increase in voting was again observed. Voting also increased significantly among the close friends of those who received the message to go to the polls, and the total effect on the friends was likely larger than the direct effect, suggesting that understanding social influence effects is potentially even more important than understanding the direct effects of messaging. These results replicate earlier work and they add to growing evidence that online social networks can be instrumental for spreading offline behaviors.

摘要

2010年美国国会选举期间的一项大规模实验表明,一条在线投票动员信息对现实世界中的投票行为产生了积极影响。在此,我们报告2012年美国总统选举期间该实验的重复结果。尽管由于来自多个渠道的动员努力达到饱和,投票动员信息在高风险选举中通常产生较小的影响,但投票率再次显著上升。收到前往投票站信息的人的密友的投票率也显著上升,对朋友的总体影响可能大于直接影响,这表明理解社会影响效应可能比理解信息的直接影响更为重要。这些结果重复了早期的研究工作,并进一步证明了在线社交网络有助于传播线下行为。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/90e7bb2ed0ac/pone.0173851.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/b08d5bf62ffb/pone.0173851.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/02853686fea6/pone.0173851.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/90e7bb2ed0ac/pone.0173851.g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/b08d5bf62ffb/pone.0173851.g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/02853686fea6/pone.0173851.g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/eeb0/5405916/90e7bb2ed0ac/pone.0173851.g003.jpg

相似文献

1
Social influence and political mobilization: Further evidence from a randomized experiment in the 2012 U.S. presidential election.社会影响与政治动员:来自2012年美国总统大选一项随机试验的进一步证据
PLoS One. 2017 Apr 26;12(4):e0173851. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0173851. eCollection 2017.
2
A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.一项涉及 6100 万人的社会影响和政治动员实验。
Nature. 2012 Sep 13;489(7415):295-8. doi: 10.1038/nature11421.
3
Toward a Developmental Science of Politics.迈向政治发展科学。
Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2019 Sep;84(3):7-185. doi: 10.1111/mono.12410.
4
Voting contagion: Modeling and analysis of a century of U.S. presidential elections.投票传染:对一个世纪以来美国总统选举的建模与分析
PLoS One. 2017 May 18;12(5):e0177970. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177970. eCollection 2017.
5
Another issue comes out: gay rights policy voting in recent U.S. presidential elections.另一个问题出现了:美国近期总统选举中的同性恋权利政策投票。
J Homosex. 2015;62(6):701-34. doi: 10.1080/00918369.2014.998954. Epub 2015 Jan 26.
6
Factors associated with post-election psychological distress: The case of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.与选举后心理困扰相关的因素:以 2016 年美国总统选举为例。
Psychiatry Res. 2018 Aug;266:1-4. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2018.05.008. Epub 2018 May 12.
7
Sexism, racism, and nationalism: Factors associated with the 2016 U.S. presidential election results?性别歧视、种族主义和民族主义:与 2016 年美国总统选举结果相关的因素?
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 9;15(3):e0229432. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229432. eCollection 2020.
8
Obesity Prevalence and Voting Behaviors in the 2016 US Presidential Election.2016年美国总统大选中的肥胖患病率与投票行为
Am J Health Behav. 2018 Sep 1;42(5):21-31. doi: 10.5993/AJHB.42.5.2.
9
#Election2020: the first public Twitter dataset on the 2020 US Presidential election.#2020年选举:首个关于2020年美国总统选举的公开推特数据集。
J Comput Soc Sci. 2022;5(1):1-18. doi: 10.1007/s42001-021-00117-9. Epub 2021 Apr 2.
10
Infections and Elections: Did an Ebola Outbreak Influence the 2014 U.S. Federal Elections (and if so, How)?感染与选举:埃博拉疫情是否影响了 2014 年美国联邦选举(如果有影响,具体是如何影响的)?
Psychol Sci. 2016 May;27(5):595-605. doi: 10.1177/0956797616628861. Epub 2016 Mar 14.

引用本文的文献

1
The effects of Facebook and Instagram on the 2020 election: A deactivation experiment.脸书和照片墙对 2020 年选举的影响:一次停用实验。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2024 May 21;121(21):e2321584121. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2321584121. Epub 2024 May 13.
2
Negativity drives online news consumption.负面新闻驱动着人们在线阅读新闻。
Nat Hum Behav. 2023 May;7(5):812-822. doi: 10.1038/s41562-023-01538-4. Epub 2023 Mar 16.
3
Exploring the direct and indirect effects of elite influence on public opinion.探讨精英影响对公众舆论的直接和间接影响。

本文引用的文献

1
Big data. The parable of Google Flu: traps in big data analysis.大数据。谷歌流感预测的教训:大数据分析中的陷阱。
Science. 2014 Mar 14;343(6176):1203-5. doi: 10.1126/science.1248506.
2
Inferring tie strength from online directed behavior.从在线有向行为推断关系强度。
PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e52168. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052168. Epub 2013 Jan 2.
3
A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization.一项涉及 6100 万人的社会影响和政治动员实验。
PLoS One. 2021 Nov 19;16(11):e0257335. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0257335. eCollection 2021.
4
Digital Surveillance to Identify California Alternative and Emerging Tobacco Industry Policy Influence and Mobilization on Facebook.利用数字监控识别加州另类和新兴烟草业在 Facebook 上的政策影响和动员
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Oct 23;18(21):11150. doi: 10.3390/ijerph182111150.
5
The influence of algorithms on political and dating decisions.算法对政治和约会决策的影响。
PLoS One. 2021 Apr 21;16(4):e0249454. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249454. eCollection 2021.
6
Low-cost, high-impact altruistic punishment promotes cooperation cascades in human social networks.低成本、高影响的利他性惩罚促进了人类社交网络中的合作级联。
Sci Rep. 2019 Feb 14;9(1):2061. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-38323-7.
7
Health Information Needs and Health Seeking Behavior During the 2014-2016 Ebola Outbreak: A Twitter Content Analysis.2014 - 2016年埃博拉疫情期间的健康信息需求与寻医行为:一项推特内容分析
PLoS Curr. 2018 Mar 23;10:ecurrents.outbreaks.fa814fb2bec36e29b718ab6af66124fa. doi: 10.1371/currents.outbreaks.fa814fb2bec36e29b718ab6af66124fa.
Nature. 2012 Sep 13;489(7415):295-8. doi: 10.1038/nature11421.
4
Social contagion theory: examining dynamic social networks and human behavior.社会传染理论:探究动态社会网络和人类行为。
Stat Med. 2013 Feb 20;32(4):556-77. doi: 10.1002/sim.5408. Epub 2012 Jun 18.
5
Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers.社交网络与狩猎采集者的合作
Nature. 2012 Jan 25;481(7382):497-501. doi: 10.1038/nature10736.
6
An experimental study of homophily in the adoption of health behavior.同群现象在健康行为采用中的实验研究。
Science. 2011 Dec 2;334(6060):1269-72. doi: 10.1126/science.1207055.
7
Spontaneous emergence of social influence in online systems.在线系统中社会影响的自发涌现。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Oct 26;107(43):18375-80. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0914572107. Epub 2010 Oct 11.
8
The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment.在线社交网络实验中的行为传播。
Science. 2010 Sep 3;329(5996):1194-7. doi: 10.1126/science.1185231.
9
Cooperative behavior cascades in human social networks.人类社交网络中的合作行为级联。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Mar 23;107(12):5334-8. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0913149107. Epub 2010 Mar 8.
10
Distinguishing influence-based contagion from homophily-driven diffusion in dynamic networks.区分动态网络中基于影响的传播和基于相似性的扩散。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Dec 22;106(51):21544-9. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908800106. Epub 2009 Dec 10.