References
- Baker, R., Blumberg, S. J., Brick, J. M., Couper, M. P., Courtright, M., Dennis, J. M., … Zahs, D. (2010). AAPOR report on online panels. Public Opinion Quarterly, 74(4): 711–781.
- Baumer, E. P. S., Adams, P., Khovanskaya, V. D., Liao, T. C., Smith, M. E., Schwanda Sosik, V. & Williams, K. (2013). Limiting, leaving, and (re)lapsing: An exploration of Facebook non-use practices and experiences. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3257–3266). New York, NY: ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2466446 - Bechmann, A. (2014). Non-informed consent cultures: Privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of Media Business Studies, 11(1): 21–38.
https://doi.org/10.1080/16522354.2014.11073574 - Bechmann, A. (2015). Managing the interoperable self. In The ubiquitous Internet: User and industry perspectives. New York: Routledge. Retrieved from
https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/e/9781317931409/chapters/10.4324%2F9781315856667-10 - Bechmann, A. (2019). Data as humans: Representation, accountability, and equality in big data and machine learning. In Power and rights in the online domain. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Bechmann, A. & Lomborg, S. (2013). Mapping actor roles in social media: Different perspectives on value creation in theories of user participation. New Media & Society, 15(5): 765–781.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812462853 - Bechmann, A. & Vahlstrup, P. B. (2015). Studying Facebook and Instagram data: The Digital Footprints software. First Monday, 20(12): 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i12.5968 - Bernstein, M. S., Bakshy, E., Burke, M. & Karrer, B. (2013). Quantifying the invisible audience in social networks. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 21–30). New York, NY: ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/2470654.2470658 - Blank, G. (2013). Who creates content? Information, Communication & Society, 16(4): 590–612.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2013.777758 - Blank, G. (2017). The digital divide among Twitter users and its implications for social research. Social Science Computer Review, 35(6): 679–697.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316671698 - Blank, G. & Lutz, C. (2017). Representativeness of social media in Great Britain: Investigating Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Pinterest, Google+, and Instagram. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(7): 741–756.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217717559 - Bowker, G. C. (2014). Big data, big questions: The theory/data thing. International Journal of Communication, 8(0): 5.
- Bruns, A., Bechmann, A., Burgess, J., Chadwick, A., Clark, L. S., Dutton, W. H., … Zimmer, M. (2018). Facebook shuts the gate after the horse has bolted, and hurts real research in the process. Internet Policy Review. Retrieved from
https://policyreview.info/articles/news/facebook-shuts-gate-after-horse-has-bolted-and-hurts-real-research-process/786 - Burke, M., Marlow, C. & Lento, T. (2010). Social network activity and social well-being. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1909–1912). New York, NY: ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753613 - Cameron, A. C. & Trivedi, P. K. (2010). Microeconometrics using Stata: Revised edition (2nd edition). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
- Correa, T. (2010). The participation divide among “online experts”: Experience, skills and psychological factors as predictors of college students’ web content creation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 16(1): 71–92.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2010.01532.x - Deursen, A. J. A. M. van & Dijk, J. A. G. M. van. (2015). Internet skill levels increase, but gaps widen: A longitudinal cross-sectional analysis (2010–2013) among the Dutch population. Information, Communication & Society, 18(7): 782–797.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.994544 - Ertiö, T., Kukkonen, I. & Räsänen, P. (2018). Social media activities in Finland: A population-level comparison. Convergence,
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856518780463 - Hallin, D. C. & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
- Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1): 276–297.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00396.x - Hargittai, E. (2015). Is bigger always better? Potential biases of big data derived from social network sites. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1): 63–76.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215570866 - Hargittai, E. & Walejko, G. (2008). The participation divide: Content creation and sharing in the digital age. Information Communication and Society, 11(2): 239–256.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180801946150 - Hausmann, R., Tyson, L. D. & Zahidi, S. (2012). The global gender gap report 2012. Geneva: World Economic Forum.
- Hoffmann, C. P., Lutz, C. & Meckel, M. (2015). Content creation on the Internet: A social cognitive perspective on the participation divide. Information, Communication & Society, 18(6): 696–716.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.991343 - Junco, R. (2013). Comparing actual and self-reported measures of Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3): 626–631.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.11.007 - Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures and their consequences. London: Sage.
- Lewis, K., Kaufman, J., Gonzalez, M., Wimmer, A. & Christakis, N. (2008). Tastes, ties, and time: A new social network dataset using Facebook.com. Social Networks, 30(4): 330–342.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2008.07.002 - Lomborg, S. & Bechmann, A. (2014). Using APIs for data collection on social media. The Information Society, 30(4): 256–265.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2014.915276 - Lutz, C. (2016). A social milieu approach to the online participation divides in Germany. Social Media + Society, 2(1):
https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115626749 - Lutz, C., Hoffmann, C. P. & Meckel, M. (2014). Beyond just politics: A systematic literature review of online participation. First Monday, 19(7).
https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v19i7.5260 - Marwick, A. E. & bBoyd, Danah. (2014). Networked privacy: How teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media & Society, 16(7): 1051–1067.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543995 - McAndrew, F. T. & Jeong, H. S. (2012). Who does what on Facebook? Age, sex, and relationship status as predictors of Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6): 2359–2365.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.007 - Nonnecke, B. & Preece, J. (2000). Lurker demographics: Counting the silent. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 73–80). New York, NY: ACM.
https://doi.org/10.1145/332040.332409 - Scheufele, D. A. (1999). Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1): 103–122.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1999.tb02784.x - Schradie, J. (2011). The digital production gap: The digital divide and Web 2.0 collide. Poetics, 39(2): 145–168.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2011.02.003 - Schradie, J. (2013). Big data not big enough? How the digital divide leaves people out. Retrieved from
http://mediashift.org/2013/07/big-data-not-big-enough-how-digital-divide-leaves-people-out/ [Accessed 2018, November 8]. - Van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4): 221–235.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004 - Wijas-Jensen, J. (2014). It-anvendelse i befolkningen 2014. Copenhagen: Statistics Denmark. Retrieved from
https://www.dst.dk/da/Statistik/Publikationer/VisPub?cid=18686 - Young, K. (2011). Social ties, social networks and the Facebook experience. Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 9: 20–34.
Language: English
Page range: 31 - 49
Published on: Jun 28, 2019
Published by: University of Gothenburg Nordicom
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 2 issues per year
Keywords:
Related subjects:
© 2019 Anja Bechmann, published by University of Gothenburg Nordicom
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.