BIG DATA IN POLITICAL COMMUNICATION: GLOBAL TRENDS, THEMATIC CLUSTERS, AND RESEARCH GAPS FROM A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18623/rvd.v23.5937Palavras-chave:
Big Data, Political Communication, Systematic Literature Review, Bibliometric Analysis, PRISMAResumo
The convergence of big data and political communication has arisen as an important research subject in the digital age, providing both benefits and challenges to democratic processes. While big data allows for more tailored and data-driven political campaigns, it also raises questions about transparency, deception, and democratic accountability. Despite growing scholarly attention, the area remains divided across disciplines and geographically centered in Western contexts, resulting in considerable gaps in the literature. This work tackles these gaps by doing a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 recommendations and combining it with bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer. A total of 45 publications published between 2019 and 2024 were examined to identify research trends, thematic clusters, institutional contributions, and regional distributions. The findings indicate four main insights: (1) publication trends have increased significantly since 2015, with notable increases during the COVID-19 pandemic; (2) research is dominated by the United States and Spain, creating a potential Western-centric bias; (3) leading contributions come from a limited number of universities, indicating the need for broader collaboration networks; and (4) the field is inherently interdisciplinary, with social sciences as the dominant discipline but increasingly complemented by com The study focuses on understudied topics such as non-Western cultures, emergent platforms like TikTok, and the ethical implications of algorithmic governance. This study, which uses SLR and bibliometric methodologies, presents a comprehensive overview of the area, identifies existing gaps, and outlines future possibilities for expanding theory and practice in big data and political communication.
Referências
Boyd, danah, & Crawford, K. (2012). CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
Burscher, B., Vliegenthart, R., & De Vreese, C. H. (2015). Using Supervised Machine Learning to Code Policy Issues. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 122–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215569441
Bustos Díaz, J. B., Ruiz del Olmo, F. J. R., & Velasco, M. N. M. (2021). Presence and specificity of the political communication of the Catalan independence leaders on Twitter in the 2017 regional elections. First Monday, 26(1). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i1.11065
Casero-Ripollés, A. (2021). Influencers in the political conversation on twitter: Identifying digital authority with big data. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(5), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052851
Cotter, K., Medeiros, M., Pak, C., & Thorson, K. (2021). “Reach the right people”: The politics of “interests” in Facebook’s classification system for ad targeting. Big Data and Society, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951721996046
Couldry, N., & Yu, J. (2018). Deconstructing datafication’s brave new world. New Media & Society, 20(12), 4473–4491. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818775968
Dubois, E., & Ford, H. (2015). Trace interviews: An actor-centered approach. International Journal of Communication, 9, 2067–2091. https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85011536692&partnerID=40&md5=4f370c1b93e0b105eaa8178d0356493f
García-Orosa, B. (2021). Disinformation, social media, bots, and astroturfing: the fourth wave of digital democracy. Profesional de La Informacion, 30(6). https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2021.nov.03
Harsin, J. (2015a). Regimes of Posttruth, Postpolitics, and Attention Economies. Communication, Culture & Critique, 8(2), 327–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/cccr.12097
Harsin, J. (2015b). Regimes of Posttruth, Postpolitics, and Attention Economies. Communication, Culture and Critique, 8(2), 327–333. https://doi.org/10.1111/cccr.12097
Harsin, J. (2021). Aggro-truth: (Dis-)trust, toxic masculinity, and the cultural logic of post-truth politics. Communication Review, 24(2), 133–166. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2021.1947740
Hu, L., & Kearney, M. W. (2021). Gendered Tweets: Computational Text Analysis of Gender Differences in Political Discussion on Twitter. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40(4), 482–503. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20969752
Iannelli, L., & Giglietto, F. (2015a). Hybrid spaces of politics: the 2013 general elections in Italy, between talk shows and Twitter. Information, Communication & Society, 18(9), 1006–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1006658
Iannelli, L., & Giglietto, F. (2015b). Hybrid spaces of politics: the 2013 general elections in Italy, between talk shows and Twitter. Information Communication and Society, 18(9), 1006–1021. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1006658
Isaak, J., & Hanna, M. J. (2018). User Data Privacy: Facebook, Cambridge Analytica, and Privacy Protection. Computer, 51(8), 56–59. https://doi.org/10.1109/MC.2018.3191268
Jensen, M. J., & Bang, H. (2015a). Digitally networked movements as problematization and politicization. Policy Studies, 36(6), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2015.1095879
Jensen, M. J., & Bang, H. (2015b). Digitally networked movements as problematization and politicization. Policy Studies, 36(6), 573–589. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2015.1095879
Jungherr, A. (2016). Four Functions of Digital Tools in Election Campaigns. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(3), 358–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161216642597
Kitchin, R. (2014). The Data Revolution: Big Data, Open Data, Data Infrastructures & Their Consequences. SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473909472
Long, J. A., & Eveland, W. P. (2021). Entertainment Use and Political Ideology: Linking Worldviews to Media Content. Communication Research, 48(4), 479–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218791011
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., Antes, G., Atkins, D., Barbour, V., Barrowman, N., Berlin, J. A., Clark, J., Clarke, M., Cook, D., D’Amico, R., Deeks, J. J., Devereaux, P. J., Dickersin, K., Egger, M., Ernst, E., Gøtzsche, P. C., … Tugwell, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj, 372. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Theocharis, Y., & Jungherr, A. (2021). Computational Social Science and the Study of Political Communication. Political Communication, 38(1–2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1833121
Tufekci, Z. (2014). Big Questions for Social Media Big Data: Representativeness, Validity and Other Methodological Pitfalls. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 8(1), 505–514. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14517
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Submeto (emos) o presente trabalho, texto original e inédito, de minha (nossa) autoria, à avaliação de Veredas do Direito - Revista de Direito, e concordo (amos) que os direitos autorais a ele referentes se tornem propriedade exclusiva da Revista Veredas, sendo vedada qualquer reprodução total ou parcial, em qualquer outra parte ou outro meio de divulgação impresso ou eletrônico, dissociado de Veredas do Direito, sem que a necessária e prévia autorização seja solicitada por escrito e obtida junto ao Editor-gerente. Declaro (amos) ainda que não existe conflito de interesse entre o tema abordado, o (s) autor (es) e empresas, instituições ou indivíduos.
Reconheço (Reconhecemos) ainda que Veredas está licenciada sob uma LICENÇA CREATIVE COMMONS:
Licença Creative Commons Attribution 3.0
