Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services. Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
The rapid rise of Twitter and other social media tools has enticed many members of Congress to personally use these services. Such waves of technological adoption are comparatively rare in Congressional history, leaving us with little knowledge about why some members of Congress adopt new technologies while others do not. We find that Twitter adoption and use are relatively difficult to predict. Members are more likely to use Twitter if they belong to the minority party, if their party leaders urge them to, if they are young, or if they serve in the Senate. Surprisingly, we find that electoral vulnerability has little or no effect on Twitter adoption or use.
The #overlyhonestmethods trend on Twitter is a space used by many scientists to peel back the curtain on their work and share observations and insights into the research world. We employ computer-assisted coding to assess the themes of 58,125 #overlyhonestmethods posts from January 7, 2013—the hashtag’s inception—to January 6, 2016. We additionally manually code a random sample of the census of tweets to evaluate the types of humor employed, as well as the targets of jokes and exclusivity of language. We offer analyses of this self-deprecating, insider conversation and an assessment of the associated ethical implications.
The impact of presidential debates on candidate evaluations remains an open topic. Research has long sought to identify the factors that matter most in citizens’ responses to debate content, including what candidates say, how they say it, and the manner in which they appear. This study uses detailed codings of the first and third 2012 presidential debates to evaluate the impact of candidates’ verbal and nonverbal behaviors on viewers’ “second screen” response—their use of computers, tablets, and mobile devices to express their reactions to the viewing experience. To examine the relationship between candidates’ on-screen behaviors and the social media response, we conduct generalized least squares regression (Prais–Winstein estimation) relating two data sources: (a) a shot-by-shot content analysis coded for rhetorical/functional, tonal, and visual elements of both candidates’ behavior during the debates, and (b) corresponding real-time measures of the volume and valence of online expression about the candidates on Twitter. We find that the nonverbal communication behaviors of candidates—their facial expressions, physical gestures, and blink rate—are consistent, robust, and significant predictors of the volume and valence of public expression during debates, rivaling the power of memes generated by candidates and contributing more than rhetorical strategies and speech tone.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.