Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Digital Literacy and the Electoral Support for Populist Candidates: A Preliminary Bibliometric and Political Analysis Cover

Digital Literacy and the Electoral Support for Populist Candidates: A Preliminary Bibliometric and Political Analysis

Open Access
|Jul 2026

References

  1. Åberg, J. and Denk, T. (2025). „Introducing the comparative semi-presidential database (CSPD)”. Eur Polit Sci 24, 706–720. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41304-024-00499-0.
  2. Aria, M. and Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959–975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2017. 08.007.
  3. Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă (2025a). „Alegeri prezidenţiale – Tur 1”. Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă. Available at: https://prezenta.roaep.ro/prezidentiale04052025/pv/romania/results. Accessed in February 2026.
  4. Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă (2025b). „Alegeri prezidenţiale – Tur 2”. Autoritatea Electorală Permanentă. Available at: https://prezenta.roaep.ro/prezidentiale18052025/pv/results?pv-candidate-chart-type=bar&pv-scope=total&pv-relative-max=max. Accessed in February 2026.
  5. Bernauer, T. and Gampfer, R. (2013). Effects of civil society involvement on popular legitimacy of global environmental governance. Global Environmental Change, 23(2), 439–449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.01.001.
  6. Blank, G. and Lutz, C. (2016). Benefits and harms from Internet use: A differentiated analysis of Great Britain. New Media & Society, 20(2), 618–640. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816667135.
  7. Branquinho, C., Kelly, C., Arevalo, L.C., Santos, A. and Gaspar de Matos, M. (2020). ‘Hey, we also have something to say’: A qualitative study of Portuguese adolescents’ and young people’s experiences under COVID‐19. Journal of Community Psychology, 48(8), 2740–2752. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcop.22453.
  8. Cheng, C., Wang, L., Xie, H. and Yan, L. (2023). Mapping digital innovation: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 194, 122706–122706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122706.
  9. Condon, M. (2015). Voice Lessons: Rethinking the Relationship Between Education and Political Participation. Political Behavior, 37(4), 819–843. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-015-9301-0.
  10. DiResta, R. (2024). Invisible Rulers: The People Who Turn Lies into Reality. New York: PublicAffairs.
  11. Duverger, M. (1980). „A New Political System Model: Semi-presidential Government”. European Journal of European Research 8(2), 165–187.
  12. Elgie, R. (1999). „The Politics of Semi-presidentialism”. In Elgie, R. (ed.). Semi-Presidentialism in Europe, 1–21. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. European Council (2026). „Members of the European Council”. European Council. Available at: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/european-council/members/. Accessed in February 2026.
  14. Eurostat (2023). „Individuals' level of digital skills (from 2021 onwards)”. Eurostat. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/isoc_sk_dskl_i21__custom_9882830/bookmark/bar?lang=en&bookmarkId=ca727989-dcca-4872-9a11-051d8950f01e&c=1707988427792. Accessed in February 2026.
  15. Ferrali, R., Grossman, G., Platas, M.R. and Rodden, J. (2019). It Takes a Village: Peer Effects and Externalities in Technology Adoption. American Journal of Political Science, 64(3), 536–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12471.
  16. Freeden, M. (2003). Ideology: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford Academic.
  17. Freedom House (2025). Countries and Territories. Freedom House. Available at: https://freedomhouse.org/country/scores.
  18. Fukuyama, F. (2025). „ It’s the Internet, Stupid”. Persuasion, October 2, 2025. Available at: https://www.persuasion.community/p/its-the-internet-stupid. Accessed in February 2025.
  19. Gabor, E., Oancea, M., and Pripp, V. (2023). „Digital democracy and the growing threat of illiberalism. opportunities and limitations as reflected by the Estonian case”. Perspective Politice, 16 (1-2), 66-84.
  20. Gabor, E., Oancea, M., and Pripp, V. (2024). „The Impact of Deep Fakes in the Age of Populism and Post-Democracy”. Revista de Stiinte Politice, (83), 32-46.
  21. Gabor, E., Oancea, M., & Pripp, V. (2025). „Hybrid Warfare through Interference in Electoral Processes Using Advanced Technology and Its Impact on Global Security. Case Study: The 2024 Romanian Presidential Election”. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence 19 (1), 1777-1797. Sciendo.
  22. Galston, W.A. (2025). Anger, Fear, Domination. Yale: Yale University Press.
  23. Heale, R. and Twycross, A. (2018). What Is a Case study? Evidence Based Nursing, 21(1), 7–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/eb-2017-102845.
  24. Ionescu, G. and Gellner, E. (eds.) (1969). Populism: Its Meaning and National Characteristics. London: Macmillan.
  25. Jennings, G.R. (2005). Business, Social Science Methods Used in. In Kempf-Leonard, K. (2005). Encyclopedia of Social Measurement., pp. 211-217, Amsterdam: Elsevier.
  26. Johnson, M. (2015) „Digital Literacy and Digital Citizenship: Approaches to Girls’ Online Experiences”, in Bailey, J. and Steeves, V. eGirls, eCitizens: Putting Technology, Theory and Policy into Dialogue with Girls’ and Young Women’s Voices, 339-360. Ottawa: Ottawa University Press.
  27. Lanches, J. (2025). „From Radicalisation to Designation: The AfD’s Extremist Turn”. International Centre for Counter-Terrorism. Available at: https://icct.nl/publication/radicalisation-designation-afds-extremist-turn. Accessed in February 2025.
  28. Kupchik, A. and Catlaw, T.J. (2015). Discipline and Participation. Youth & Society, [online] 47(1), 95–124. https://doi.org/10.1177/0044118x14544675.
  29. Lelieveldt, H., Dekker, K., Völker, B. and Torenvlied, R. (2009). Civic Organizations as Political Actors. Urban Affairs Review, 45(1), 3–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1078087409332303.
  30. Machimbarrena, J.M., Calvete, E., Fernández-González, L., Álvarez-Bardón, A., Álvarez-Fernández, L. and González-Cabrera, J. (2018). Internet Risks: An Overview of Victimization in Cyberbullying, Cyber Dating Abuse, Sexting, Online Grooming and Problematic Internet Use. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(11), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15112471.
  31. Martzoukou, K., Fulton, C., Kostagiolas, P. and Lavranos, C. (2020). A study of higher education students’ self-perceived digital competences for learning and everyday life online participation. Journal of Documentation, 76(6), 1-46. https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-03-2020-0041.
  32. Ministère de l'Intérieur (2024). "Résultats de l'élection présidentielle 2022". Available at: https://www.archives-resultats-elections.interieur.gouv.fr/resultats/presidentielle-2022/index.php. Accessed in February 2026.
  33. Misheva, G. (2024). DigComp: the EU Digital Competence Framework | Digital Skills & Jobs Platform. Retrieved from: https://digital-skills-jobs.europa.eu/en/actions/european-initiatives/digital-competence-framework-digcomp.
  34. Mongeon, P. and Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a Comparative Analysis. Scientometrics, 106(1), pp.213–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.
  35. Mos, M. and Piovezan, I.M. (2024). „Leadership in international populism: How Viktor Orbán’s Hungary shows the way”. New Perspectives, 32(4), 329-346.
  36. Mudde C, and Rovira Kaltwasser C. (2013). „Exclusionary vs. Inclusionary Populism: Comparing Contemporary Europe and Latin America”. Government and Opposition. 48(2), 147-174. doi:10.1017/gov.2012.11
  37. Mudde, C. and Rovira Kaltwasser, C. (2017). Populism: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford Academic, https://doi.org/10.1093/actrade/9780190234874.001.0001.
  38. Norman, L. (2025). „Positions on populism in the European Parliament”. Journal of European Integration, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/07036337.2025.2573277.
  39. Passas, I. (2024). Bibliometric Analysis: The Main Steps. Encyclopedia, 4(2), 1014–1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4020065.
  40. Powell, A., Bryne, A. and Dailey, D. (2010). The Essential Internet: Digital Exclusion in Low-Income American Communities. Policy & Internet, 2(2), 159–190. https://doi.org/10.2202/1944-2866.1058.
  41. Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World. Publications, 9(1). 1-59 https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012.
  42. Schwandt, T. and Gates, E.F. (2017). Case Study Methodology. In: The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage, pp.1–955.
  43. Shreiner, T.L. (2017). Data Literacy for Social Studies: Examining the Role of Data Visualizations in K–12 Textbooks. Theory & Research in Social Education, 46(2), pp.194–231. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2017.1400483.
  44. Stan, S. (2010). România după 1989: enciclopedie de istorie. Bucureşti: Meronia.
  45. Sutherland, E. (2019). The Fourth Industrial Revolution – The Case of South Africa. Politikon, [online] 47(2), pp.1–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02589346.2019.1696003.
  46. The Central Electoral Commission of the Republic of Lithuania (2024). „Elections of the President of the Republic and Referendum on the Amendment of Article 12 of the Constitution, 12 May 2024”. The Central Electoral Commission of the Republic of Lithuania (2024). Available at: https://www.vrk.lt/en/2024-prezidento/rezultatai. Accessed in February 2026.
  47. Tirado-Morueta, R., Aguaded-Gómez, J.I. and Hernando-Gómez, Á. (2018). The socio-demographic divide in Internet usage moderated by digital literacy support. Technology in Society, [online] 55, 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2018.06.001.
  48. van Deursen, A.J.A.M. and Helsper, E.J. (2015). The Third-Level Digital Divide: Who Benefits Most from Being Online? Communication and Information Technologies Annual, [online] 10(1), 29–52. https://doi.org/10.1108/s2050-206020150000010002.
  49. Van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In: Ding, Y., Rousseau, R. and Wolfram, D. (2014). Measuring scholarly impact: Methods and practice, pp. 285-320.
  50. van Eck, N.J. and Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111(2), 1053–1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7.
  51. Vuorikari, R., Kluzer, S. and Yves, P. (2022). DigComp 2.2, The Digital Competence framework for citizens: with new examples of knowledge, skills and attitudes. Retrieved from https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/50c53c01-abeb-11ec-83e1-01aa75ed71a1/language-en
  52. Wiles, P. (1969). „A Syndrome, Not a Doctrine: Some Elementary Theses on Populism”, in Ionescu, G. and Gellner, E. (eds.) Populism: Its Meaning and National Characteristics. London: Macmillan.
Language: English
Page range: 391 - 412
Published on: Jul 16, 2026
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2026 Eugen GABOR, Marian OANCEA, Vladimir PRIPP, published by Bucharest University of Economic Studies
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.