The effects of using Facebook and Twitter on
candidates’ electoral success
The case of the German Federal Election 2013
Joss Roßmann, Tobias Gummer, & Stephen Quinlan
GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences
General Online Research (GOR16)
02-04 March 2016, HTW Dresden, Germany
Internet & Online Campaigning
 Obama‘s campaigns 2008 & 2012 as widely cited
examples of successful online campaigning (e.g.,
Jungherr 2014)
 Stimulated the use of social media (e.g., YouTube,
Facebook, and Twitter) in online campaigns in many
countries …
 … as well as reserach on their use in campaigning
(e.g., Dolezal 2015; Kruikemeier 2014; Lassen &
Brown 2011; Vergeer & Hermans 2013)
 Social media have received increasing attention
in the German Federal Elections 2009 & 2013
2
Social Media & Electoral Success
 Personalization (Vergeer et al. 2013)
 Interactivity (Kruikemeier 2014)
 Network effects (e.g., retweets)
 Gatekeeper (Jürgens & Jungherr 2011)
 Multiplicators
 Opinon leader (Karlsen 2015)
 Mass media (Vergeer et al. 2013)
3
Social Media Use in Germany
 Twitter: Very limited coverage in Germany
(Busemann 2013)
 2013 ≈ 3.9 m user (7% of online population)
 Large differences in usage across age groups
 14-29 years = 14%
 Low intensity of usage & passive use (Busemann
2013)
 Facebook: Larger coverage among voters in
Germany (Busemann 2013)
 2013 ≈ 23 m user (~41% of online pop.)
 Higher intensity of usage compared to Twitter
4
Research Question
 What are the effects of the use of Facebook
and Twitter by candidates in the 2013
German national election on their electoral
success?
5
Data
 Candidates of the most relevant parties: CDU/CSU,
SPD, FDP, GREEN party, LEFT party, & PIRATES
 Data
 GESIS project on the use of Twitter & Facebook (ZA5973)
 N = 2,345
 Candidate survey of the GLES 2013 (ZA5716)
 Response rate = 41%, N = 1,000 (complete Interviews)
 Bundeswahlleiter: Official data on the election results
 Vote share for direct candidates (1st vote) and parties
(2nd vote) on the level of electoral districts
 Elected candidates (direct & party lists)
6
Election results
Share of 1st and 2nd votes for the parties in the German
Federal Election 2013
50
45
45.3
41.5
DV1: Elected
Vote share (in %)
40
35
29.4
30
DV2: Share of 1st vote
25.7
25
20
15
8.2 8.6
10
5
2.4
4.8
8.7
7.3 8.4
5.1
2.2 2.2
0
CDU/CSU
SPD
FDP
LEFT
Party
GREEN
PIRATES
Others
7
Direct and List Seats in
the German Federal
Election 2013
Direct and list seats
Absolute number of seats
250
236
200
150
100
135
75
62
60
58
50
4
1
0
CDU/CSU
SPD
LEFT
GREEN
Party
Source: Bundeswahlleiter (http://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/de/)
Source: „Direktmandate nach Partei und Vorsprung – Bundestagswahl 2013,
endgültiges Ergebnis“ retrieved from wahlatlas.net. Licensed under CC8BY-SA
3.0 via Wikimedia Commons.
Twitter usage
1,00
Twitter usage: Direct (N=1,734) and list candidates ( N=611)
0,80
0.84
0.51
0.45
0.44
0.40
0.38
0.31
0.20
0.18
0.18
0.09
0,00
0,20
0,40
0,60
0.77
CDU/CSU
SPD
FDP
GREEN
LEFT
PIRATES
Party
Direct candidates (M=0.46)
List candidates (M=0.32)
Data: GESIS project on the use of Twitter & Facebook
9
Facebook usage: Direct (N=1,734) and list candidates ( N=611)
0.92
0.82
0.71
0.70
0.64
0.61
0,60
0,80
1,00
Facebook usage
0.60
0.55
0.49
0.52
0.47
0,00
0,20
0,40
0.47
CDU/CSU
SPD
FDP
GREEN
LEFT
PIRATES
Party
Direct candidates (M=0.72)
List candidates (M=0.52)
Data: GESIS project on the use of Twitter & Facebook
10
Results
Elected: Direct candidates ( N=428)
Twitter
Twitter profile
Mean no. of tweets
Retweets (in %)
@user (in %)
URL (in %)
#hashtags (in %)
p < 0.05
Facebook
Facebook wall
Controls
Party: CDU/CSU
... SPD
... GREEN
... LEFT
Woman
Age (in decades)
Academic title
Incumbent
Candidate is listed
Budget: 0 - <1,000€
... 1,000 - <5,000€
... 5,000 - <15,000€
... >15,000€
Time used for campaigning (hrs per week)
Campaign: Personalized vs. party-centered
Importance: Street campaigning
Importance: Citizen consultation
Importance: Visiting companies/associations
Importance: Personal posters
Importance: Web page
-0.75
-0.50
-0.25
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
Average marginal effects
Model: Log. regression, robust standard errors, 95% CIs, Pseudo-R²=0.59
Data: GESIS, GLES candidate survey, & Bundeswahlleiter
11
Results
Share of 1st votes: Direct candidates ( N=1,734)
Twitter
Twitter profile
Mean no. of tweets
Retweets (in %)
@user (in %)
URL (in %)
#hashtags (in %)
-0.07
0.03
0.54
0.06
0.07
0.31
Facebook
Facebook wall
0.65
0.00
-14.08
-40.47
-35.50
-34.34
-39.63
-0.32
-0.15
1.33
5.62
-0.79
42.18
-40,00
-20,00
0,00
20,00
Unstandardized regression coefficients
Model: Linear regression, robust standard errors, 95% CIs, Adj. R²=0.88
Data: GESIS & Bundeswahlleiter
Controls
Party: CDU/CSU
... SPD
... FDP
... GREEN
... LEFT
... PIRATES
Woman
Age (in decades)
Academic title
Incumbent
Candidate is listed
Intercept
40,00
12
Results
Share of 1st votes: Direct candidates ( N=1,734)
Twitter
-0.07
Twitter profile
0.03
p < 0.10
Mean no. of tweets
0.54
Retweets (in %)
0.06
@user (in %)
0.07
URL (in %)
0.31
#hashtags (in %)
Facebook
0.65
-4.00
p < 0.10
-2.00
0.00
2.00
Unstandardized regression coefficients
Model: Linear regression, robust standard errors, 95% CIs, Adj. R²=0.88
Data: GESIS & Bundeswahlleiter
Facebook wall
4.00
13
Results
Share of 1st votes: Direct candidates ( N=666)
p > 0.10
Twitter
Twitter profile
Mean no. of tweets
Retweets (in %)
@user (in %)
URL (in %)
#hashtags (in %)
Facebook
Facebook wall
Controls
Party: CDU/CSU
... SPD
... FDP
... GREEN
... LEFT
... PIRATES
Woman
Age (in decades)
Academic title
Incumbent
Candidate is listed
Budget: 0 - <1,000€
... 1,000 - <5,000€
... 5,000 - <15,000€
... >15,000€
Time used for campaigning (hrs per week)
Campaign: Personalized vs. party-centered
Importance: Street campaigning
Importance: Citizen consultation
Importance: Visiting companies/associations
Importance: Personal posters
Importance: Web page
Intercept
-40.00
-20.00
0.00
20.00
40.00
Unstandardized regression coefficients
Model: Linear regression, robust standard errors, 95% CIs, Adj. R²=0.88
Data: GESIS, GLES candidate survey, & Bundeswahlleiter
14
Conclusions
 Large variation in the use of Twitter and
Facebook across parties and types of
candidature
 No or very limited effects of Twitter use on
electoral success
 rather weak evidence for effects of Facebook use
 Normalization of online campaigning
 Twitter and Facebook have become essential
means of professional (and personalized)
campaigning by the candidates
 Party affilation, budget, incumbent bonus
15
Thank you for your attention!
16
References
Busemann, Katrin. 2013. Wer nutzt was im Social Web? Media Perspektiven, 2013(7-8): 391-399.
Dolezal, Martin. 2015. Online Campaigning by Austrian Political Candidates: Determinants of Using Personal
Websites, Facebook, and Twitter. Policy & Internet, 7(1): 103-119.
Gibson, Rachel K. und McAllister, Ian. 2015. Normalising or Equalising Party Competition? Assessing the Impact
of the Web on Election Campaigning. Political Studies, 63(3): 529-547.
Jungherr, Andreas. 2014. The Role of the Internet in Political Campaigns in Germany. German Politics: 1-8.
Jürgens, Pascal und Jungherr, Andreas. 2011. Wahlkampf vom Sofa aus: Twitter im Bundestagswahlkampf
2009. In: Eva Johanna Schweitzer und Steffen Albrecht (Eds.), Das Internet im Wahlkampf, S. 201-225.
Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Karlsen, Rune. 2015. Followers are Opinion Leaders: The Role of People in the Flow of Political Communication
on and beyond Social Networking Sites. European Journal of Communication, 30(3): 301-318.
Kruikemeier, Sanne. 2014. How Political Candidates Use Twitter and the Impact on Votes. Computers in Human
Behavior, 34: 131-139.
Lassen, David S. und Brown, Adam R. 2011. Twitter: The Electoral Connection? Social Science Computer
Review, 29(4): 419-436.
Vergeer, Maurice und Hermans, Liesbeth. 2013. Campaigning on Twitter: Microblogging and Online Social
Networking as Campaign Tools in the 2010 General Elections in the Netherlands. Journal of ComputerMediated Communication, 18(4): 399-419.
Vergeer, Maurice, Hermans, Liesbeth und Sams, Steven. 2013. Online Social Networks and Micro-Blogging in
Political Campaigning: The Exploration of a New Campaign Tool and a New Campaign Style. Party
Politics, 19(3): 477-501.