This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Aalberg, T., Papathanassopoulos, S., Soroka, S., Curran, J., Hayashi, K., Iyengar, S., Jones, P. K., Mazzoleni, G., Rojas, H., Rowe, D., & Tiffen, R. (2013). International TV news, foreign affairs interest and public knowledge. Journalism Studies, 14(3), 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.765636AalbergT.PapathanassopoulosS.SorokaS.CurranJ.HayashiK.IyengarS.JonesP. K.MazzoleniG.RojasH.RoweD.TiffenR.2013International TV news, foreign affairs interest and public knowledge143387406https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2013.765636Search in Google Scholar
Accurat, & Google News Lab. (2016, November 8). World potus. Retrieved November 23, 2017 from http://www.worldpotus.com/#/clinton/candidates/countries/drops/outside-usa/Accurat, & Google News Lab2016November8Retrieved November 23, 2017 from http://www.worldpotus.com/#/clinton/candidates/countries/drops/outside-usa/Search in Google Scholar
Aljebreen, A., Meng, W., & Dragut, E. (2021, May 18). Segmentation of tweets with urls and its applications to sentiment analysis. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 35(14), 12480–12488. https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v35i14.17480AljebreenA.MengW.DragutE.2021May18Segmentation of tweets with urls and its applications to sentiment analysis35141248012488https://doi.org/10.1609/aaai.v35i14.17480Search in Google Scholar
Andersen, J., & Jerijervi, D. R. (2020, November 26). Norske medier skriver over 200 saker om Trump i døgnet [Norwegian media write over 200 articles about Trump a day]. Kampanje. https://kampanje.com/medier/2020/11/norske-medier-skriver-over-200-saker-om-trump-i-dognetAndersenJ.JerijerviD. R.2020November26Kampanjehttps://kampanje.com/medier/2020/11/norske-medier-skriver-over-200-saker-om-trump-i-dognetSearch in Google Scholar
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. University of Minnesota Press.AppaduraiA.1996University of Minnesota PressSearch in Google Scholar
Arendt, F., Northup, T., & Camaj, L. (2019). Selective exposure and news media brands: Implicit and explicit attitudes as predictors of news choice. Media Psychology, 22(3), 526–543. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1338963ArendtF.NorthupT.CamajL.2019Selective exposure and news media brands: Implicit and explicit attitudes as predictors of news choice223526543https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2017.1338963Search in Google Scholar
Bail, C. (2022). Breaking the social media prism: How to make our platforms less polarizing. Princeton University Press.BailC.2022Princeton University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160BakshyE.MessingS.AdamicL. A.2015Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook348623911301132https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa1160Search in Google Scholar
Benkler, Y., Faris, R., & Roberts, H. (2018). Network propaganda: Manipulation, disinformation, and radicalization in American politics. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/network-propaganda-9780190923624BenklerY.FarisR.RobertsH.2018Oxford University Presshttps://global.oup.com/academic/product/network-propaganda-9780190923624Search in Google Scholar
Bhagat, S., & Kim, D. J. (2022). Examining users’ news sharing behaviour on social media: Role of perception of online civic engagement and dual social influences. Behaviour & Information Technology, 42(8), 1194–1215. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2066019BhagatS.KimD. J.2022Examining users’ news sharing behaviour on social media: Role of perception of online civic engagement and dual social influences42811941215https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2022.2066019Search in Google Scholar
Blondel, V. D., Guillaume, J.-L., Lambiotte, R., & Lefebvre, E. (2008). Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment, 2008(10), P10008. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008BlondelV. D.GuillaumeJ.-L.LambiotteR.LefebvreE.2008Fast unfolding of communities in large networks200810P10008https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/P10008Search in Google Scholar
Borra, E., & Rieder, B. (2014). Programmed method: Developing a toolset for capturing and analyzing tweets. Aslib Journal of Information Management, 66(3), 262–278. https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0094BorraE.RiederB.2014Programmed method: Developing a toolset for capturing and analyzing tweets663262278https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0094Search in Google Scholar
Bovet, A., Morone, F., & Makse, H. A. (2018). Validation of Twitter opinion trends with national polling aggregates: Hillary Clinton vs Donald Trump. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 8673. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26951-yBovetA.MoroneF.MakseH. A.2018Validation of Twitter opinion trends with national polling aggregates: Hillary Clinton vs Donald Trump818673https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-26951-ySearch in Google Scholar
Boyon, N. (2020, Oct. 28). Outside the U.S., Biden is the clear favorite. Ipsos. https://www.ipsos.com/en/global-views-us-presidential-electionBoyonN.2020Oct.28Ipsoshttps://www.ipsos.com/en/global-views-us-presidential-electionSearch in Google Scholar
Bruns, A. (2018). Gatewatching and news curation: Journalism, social media, and the public sphere. Peter Lang.BrunsA.2018Peter LangSearch in Google Scholar
Bruns, A. (2019). Are filter bubbles real? John Wiley & Sons.BrunsA.2019John Wiley & SonsSearch in Google Scholar
Bruns, A., & Enli, G. (2018). The Norwegian Twittersphere: Structure and dynamics. Nordicom Review, 39(1), 129–148. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2018-0006BrunsA.EnliG.2018The Norwegian Twittersphere: Structure and dynamics391129148https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2018-0006Search in Google Scholar
Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S. (2012). Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4), 160–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2012.744249BrunsA.StieglitzS.2012Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter303–4160185https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2012.744249Search in Google Scholar
Bruns, A., Burgess, J., & Highfield, T. (2014). A ‘big data’ approach to mapping the Australian Twittersphere. In P. L. Arthur, & K. Bode (Eds.), Advancing digital humanities (pp. 113–129). Palgrave Macmillan.BrunsA.BurgessJ.HighfieldT.2014A ‘big data’ approach to mapping the Australian TwittersphereInArthurP. L.BodeK.(Eds.),113129Palgrave MacmillanSearch in Google Scholar
Castells, M. (2015). Networks of outrage and hope: Social movements in the internet age. Polity.CastellsM.2015PolitySearch in Google Scholar
Clark, T. S., Staton, J. K., Wang, Y., & Agichtein, E. (2018). Using Twitter to study public discourse in the wake of judicial decisions: Public reactions to the supreme court’s same-sex-marriage cases. Journal of Law and Courts, 6(1), 93–126. https://doi.org/10.1086/695423ClarkT. S.StatonJ. K.WangY.AgichteinE.2018Using Twitter to study public discourse in the wake of judicial decisions: Public reactions to the supreme court’s same-sex-marriage cases6193126https://doi.org/10.1086/695423Search in Google Scholar
Colleoni, E., Rozza, A., & Arvidsson, A. (2014). Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. Journal of Communication, 64(2), 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12084ColleoniE.RozzaA.ArvidssonA.2014Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data642317332https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12084Search in Google Scholar
Conover, M., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M. R., Gonçalves, B., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2011). Political polarization on Twitter. Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), 5(1), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126ConoverM.RatkiewiczJ.FranciscoM. R.GonçalvesB.MenczerF.FlamminiA.2011Political polarization on Twitter518996https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126Search in Google Scholar
Dahlgren, P. M. (2021). A critical review of filter bubbles and a comparison with selective exposure. Nordicom Review, 42(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0002DahlgrenP. M.2021A critical review of filter bubbles and a comparison with selective exposure4211533https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2021-0002Search in Google Scholar
Education First. (2019). Ef English proficiency index. Retrieved October 14, 2019, from http://www.ef.co.uk/epi/Education First2019Retrieved October 14, 2019, from http://www.ef.co.uk/epi/Search in Google Scholar
Enjolras, B., & Salway, A. (2022). Homophily and polarization on political twitter during the 2017 Norwegian election. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 13(10). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-022-01018-zEnjolrasB.SalwayA.2022Homophily and polarization on political twitter during the 2017 Norwegian election1310https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-022-01018-zSearch in Google Scholar
Figenschou, T. U., & Ihlebæk, K. A. (2019). Challenging journalistic authority. Journalism Studies, 20(9), 1221–1237. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1500868FigenschouT. U.IhlebækK. A.2019Challenging journalistic authority20912211237https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1500868Search in Google Scholar
Finkel, E. J., Bail, C. A., Cikara, M., Ditto, P. H., Iyengar, S., Klar, S., Mason, L., McGrath, M. C., Nyhan, B., Rand, D. G., Skitka, L. J., Tucker, J. A., Van Bavel, J. J., Wang, C. S., & Druckman, J. N. (2020). Political sectarianism in America. Science, 370(6516), 533–536. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715FinkelE. J.BailC. A.CikaraM.DittoP. H.IyengarS.KlarS.MasonL.McGrathM. C.NyhanB.RandD. G.SkitkaL. J.TuckerJ. A.Van BavelJ. J.WangC. S.DruckmanJ. N.2020Political sectarianism in America3706516533536https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abe1715Search in Google Scholar
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006FlaxmanS.GoelS.RaoJ. M.2016Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption80S1298320https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006Search in Google Scholar
Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017). Are news audiences increasingly fragmented? A cross-national comparative analysis of cross-platform news audience fragmentation and duplication. Journal of Communication, 67(4), 476–498. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12315FletcherR.NielsenR. K.2017Are news audiences increasingly fragmented? A cross-national comparative analysis of cross-platform news audience fragmentation and duplication674476498https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12315Search in Google Scholar
Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450–2468. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170FletcherR.NielsenR. K.2018Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis20724502468https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817724170Search in Google Scholar
Gaol, F. L., Maulana, A., & Matsuo, T. (2020). News consumption patterns on Twitter: Fragmentation study on the online news media network. Heliyon, 6(10), e05169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05169GaolF. L.MaulanaA.MatsuoT.2020News consumption patterns on Twitter: Fragmentation study on the online news media network610e05169https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e05169Search in Google Scholar
Gentzkow, M. (2016). Polarization in 2016 [White Paper]. Toulouse Network of Information Technology, Stanford University. https://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/PolarizationIn2016.pdfGentzkowM.2016Toulouse Network of Information Technology, Stanford Universityhttps://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/PolarizationIn2016.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2011). Ideological segregation online and offline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1799–1839. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr044GentzkowM.ShapiroJ. M.2011Ideological segregation online and offline126417991839https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjr044Search in Google Scholar
Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B., & Lazer, D. (2019). Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374–378. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706GrinbergN.JosephK.FriedlandL.Swire-ThompsonB.LazerD.2019Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election3636425374378https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706Search in Google Scholar
Guerra, P. H. C., Meira Jr, W., Cardie, C., & Kleinberg, R. (2013). A measure of polarization on social media networks based on community boundaries. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 7(1), 15–224. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14421GuerraP. H. C.MeiraW.JrCardieC.KleinbergR.2013A measure of polarization on social media networks based on community boundaries7115224https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14421Search in Google Scholar
Ha, L., Xu, Y., Yang, C., Wang, F., Yang, L., Abuljadail, M., Hu, X., Jiang, W., & Gabay, I. (2018). Decline in news content engagement or news medium engagement? A longitudinal analysis of news engagement since the rise of social and mobile media 2009–2012. Journalism, 19(5), 718–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916667654HaL.XuY.YangC.WangF.YangL.AbuljadailM.HuX.JiangW.GabayI.2018Decline in news content engagement or news medium engagement? A longitudinal analysis of news engagement since the rise of social and mobile media 2009–2012195718739https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884916667654Search in Google Scholar
Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (2004). Comparing media systems: Three models of media and politics. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790867HallinD. C.ManciniP.2004Cambridge University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790867Search in Google Scholar
Hedman, F., Sivnert, F., Kollanyi, B., Narayanan, V., Neudert, L.-M., & Howard, P. N. (2018). News and political information consumption in Sweden: Mapping the 2018 Swedish general election on Twitter. Computational Propaganda Data Memo, Oxford: Oxford Internet Institute, 6. https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/09/Hedman-et-al-2018.pdfHedmanF.SivnertF.KollanyiB.NarayananV.NeudertL.-M.HowardP. N.2018News and political information consumption in Sweden: Mapping the 2018 Swedish general election on TwitterOxfordOxford Internet Institute6https://demtech.oii.ox.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/09/Hedman-et-al-2018.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Herkman, J., & Jungar, A.-C. (2021). Populism and media and communication studies in the Nordic countries. In E. Skogerbø, Ø. Ihlen, N. N. Kristensen, & L. Nord (Eds.), Power, communication, and politics in the Nordic countries (pp. 241–261). Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-12HerkmanJ.JungarA.-C.2021Populism and media and communication studies in the Nordic countriesInSkogerbøE.IhlenØ.KristensenN. N.NordL.(Eds.),241261Nordicom, University of Gothenburghttps://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-12Search in Google Scholar
Hermida, A., Fletcher, F., Korell, D., & Logan, D. (2012). Share, like, recommend. Journalism Studies, 13(5–6), 815–824. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2012.664430HermidaA.FletcherF.KorellD.LoganD.2012Share, like, recommend135–6815824https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2012.664430Search in Google Scholar
Himelboim, I. (2017). Social network analysis (social media). In J. Matthes (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of communication research methods (pp. 1–15). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0236HimelboimI.2017Social network analysis (social media)InMatthesJ.(Ed.),115Wileyhttps://doi.org/10.1002/9781118901731.iecrm0236Search in Google Scholar
Himelboim, I., McCreery, S., & Smith, M. (2013). Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 18(2), 154–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12001HimelboimI.McCreeryS.SmithM.2013Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter182154174https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12001Search in Google Scholar
Himelboim, I., Sweetser, K. D., Tinkham, S. F., Cameron, K., Danelo, M., & West, K. (2016). Valence-based homophily on Twitter: Network analysis of emotions and political talk in the 2012 presidential election. New Media & Society, 18(7), 1382–1400. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814555096HimelboimI.SweetserK. D.TinkhamS. F.CameronK.DaneloM.WestK.2016Valence-based homophily on Twitter: Network analysis of emotions and political talk in the 2012 presidential election18713821400https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814555096Search in Google Scholar
Hindman, M. (2009). The myth of digital democracy. Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7scb3HindmanM.2009Princeton University Presshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7scb3Search in Google Scholar
Hänska, M., & Bauchowitz, S. (2019). Can social media facilitate a European public sphere? Transnational communication and the Europeanization of Twitter during the eurozone crisis. Social Media + Society, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119854686HänskaM.BauchowitzS.2019Can social media facilitate a European public sphere? Transnational communication and the Europeanization of Twitter during the eurozone crisis53https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119854686Search in Google Scholar
Ihlebæk, K. A., & Nygaard, S. (2021). Right-wing alternative media in the Scandinavian political communication landscape. In E. Skogerbø, Ø. Ihlen, N. N. Kristensen, & L. Nord (Eds.), Power, communication, and politics in the Nordic countries (pp. 263–282). Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-13IhlebækK. A.NygaardS.2021Right-wing alternative media in the Scandinavian political communication landscapeInSkogerbøE.IhlenØ.KristensenN. N.NordL.(Eds.),263282Nordicom, University of Gothenburghttps://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-13Search in Google Scholar
Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50(6), 1141–1151. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141IsenbergD. J.1986Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis50611411151https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.50.6.1141Search in Google Scholar
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.xIyengarS.HahnK. S.2009Red media, blue media: Evidence of ideological selectivity in media use5911939https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.xSearch in Google Scholar
Iyengar, S., Sood, G., & Lelkes, Y. (2012). Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 76(3), 405–431. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41684577IyengarS.SoodG.LelkesY.2012Affect, not ideology: A social identity perspective on polarization763405431http://www.jstor.org/stable/41684577Search in Google Scholar
Jacomy, M., Venturini, T., Heymann, S., & Bastian, M. (2014). Forceatlas2, a continuous graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi software. PloS one, 9(6), e98679. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098679JacomyM.VenturiniT.HeymannS.BastianM.2014Forceatlas2, a continuous graph layout algorithm for handy network visualization designed for the Gephi software96e98679https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098679Search in Google Scholar
Jurkowitz, M., Mitchell, A., Shearer, E., & Walker, M. (2022). U.S. Media polarization and the 2020 election: A nation divided. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/u-s-media-polarization-and-the-2020-election-a-nation-dividedJurkowitzM.MitchellA.ShearerE.WalkerM.2022Pew Research Centerhttps://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2020/01/24/u-s-media-polarization-and-the-2020-election-a-nation-dividedSearch in Google Scholar
Larsson, A. O. (2020). Right-wingers on the rise online: Insights from the 2018 Swedish elections. New Media & Society, 22(12), 2108–2127. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819887700LarssonA. O.2020Right-wingers on the rise online: Insights from the 2018 Swedish elections221221082127https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819887700Search in Google Scholar
Leetaru, K. (2021, January 31). Tracking Twitter’s growth 2012–2021: Covid-19 & election 2020. RealClearWire. https://realclearwire.com/video/2021/01/31/tracking_twitters_growth_2012-2021_covid-19_and_election_2020_658613.htmlLeetaruK.2021January31RealClearWirehttps://realclearwire.com/video/2021/01/31/tracking_twitters_growth_2012-2021_covid-19_and_election_2020_658613.htmlSearch in Google Scholar
Leetaru, K., Wang, S., Padmanabhan, A., & Shook, E. (2013). Mapping the global Twitter heartbeat: The geography of Twitter. First Monday, 18(5). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i5.4366LeetaruK.WangS.PadmanabhanA.ShookE.2013Mapping the global Twitter heartbeat: The geography of Twitter185https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i5.4366Search in Google Scholar
Lelkes, Y. (2016). Mass polarization: Manifestations and measurements. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 392–410. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw005LelkesY.2016Mass polarization: Manifestations and measurements80S1392410https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw005Search in Google Scholar
Livingstone, S., & Markham, T. (2008). The contribution of media consumption to civic participation. The British Journal of Sociology, 59(2), 351–371. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2008.00197.xLivingstoneS.MarkhamT.2008The contribution of media consumption to civic participation592351371https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2008.00197.xSearch in Google Scholar
Mason, L. (2013). The rise of uncivil agreement: Issue versus behavioral polarization in the American electorate. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(1), 140–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764212463363MasonL.2013The rise of uncivil agreement: Issue versus behavioral polarization in the American electorate571140159https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764212463363Search in Google Scholar
Mitchell, A., Gottfried, J., Kiley, J., & Matsa, K. E. (2014, October 21). Political polarization & media habits. Pew Research Center. http://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/#MitchellA.GottfriedJ.KileyJ.MatsaK. E.2014October21Pew Research Centerhttp://www.journalism.org/2014/10/21/political-polarization-media-habits/#Search in Google Scholar
Mutz, D. C. (2006). How the mass media divide us. In D. Brady, & P. Divola (Eds.), Red and blue nation? Characteristics and causes of America’s polarized politics (Vol. 1) (pp. 223–242). Brookings Institution Press.MutzD. C.2006How the mass media divide usInBradyD.DivolaP.(Eds.),1223242Brookings Institution PressSearch in Google Scholar
Mutz, D. C., & Young, L. (2011). Communication and public opinion: Plus ça change? The Public Opinion Quarterly, 75(5), 1018–1044. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41345920MutzD. C.YoungL.2011Communication and public opinion: Plus ça change?75510181044http://www.jstor.org/stable/41345920Search in Google Scholar
Napoli, P. M. (2011). Audience evolution: New technologies and the transformation of media audiences. Columbia University Press.NapoliP. M.2011Columbia University PressSearch in Google Scholar
Narayanan, V., Barash, V., Kelly, J., Kollanyi, B., Neudert, L.-M., & Howard, P. N. (2018). Polarization, partisanship and junk news consumption over social media in the US. arXiv preprint arX-iv:1803.01845. https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/polarization-partisanship-and-junk-news/NarayananV.BarashV.KellyJ.KollanyiB.NeudertL.-M.HowardP. N.2018Polarization, partisanship and junk news consumption over social media in the USarX-iv:1803.01845. https://comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/polarization-partisanship-and-junk-news/Search in Google Scholar
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017). Reuters Institute digital news report 2017. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/digital-news-report-2017NewmanN.FletcherR.KalogeropoulosA.LevyD. A. L.NielsenR. K.2017Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxfordhttps://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/our-research/digital-news-report-2017Search in Google Scholar
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Schulz, A., Andı, S., & Nielsen, R. K. (2020). Reuters Institute digital news report 2020. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report-2020NewmanN.FletcherR.SchulzA.AndıS.NielsenR. K.2020Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxfordhttps://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report-2020Search in Google Scholar
Oscarsson, H., & Strömbäck, J. (2019). Political communication in the 2018 Swedish election campaign. Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift, 121(3), 319–345. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1333531/FULLTEXT01.pdfOscarssonH.StrömbäckJ.2019Political communication in the 2018 Swedish election campaign1213319345https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1333531/FULLTEXT01.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Papacharissi, Z. (2015). Affective politics: Sentiment, technology, and politics. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199999736.001.0001PapacharissiZ.2015Oxford University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199999736.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin U.K.PariserE.2011Penguin U.K.Search in Google Scholar
Prior, M. (2005). News vs. entertainment: How increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge and turnout. American Journal of Political Science, 49(3), 577–592. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00143.xPriorM.2005News vs. entertainment: How increasing media choice widens gaps in political knowledge and turnout493577592https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00143.xSearch in Google Scholar
Prior, M. (2013). Media and political polarization. Annual Review of Political Science, 16, 101–127. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242PriorM.2013Media and political polarization16101127https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-100711-135242Search in Google Scholar
Rauchfleisch, A., Vogler, D., & Eisenegger, M. (2020). Transnational news sharing on social media: Measuring and analysing Twitter news media repertoires of domestic and foreign audience communities. Digital Journalism, 8(9), 1206–1230. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1835511RauchfleischA.VoglerD.EiseneggerM.2020Transnational news sharing on social media: Measuring and analysing Twitter news media repertoires of domestic and foreign audience communities8912061230https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1835511Search in Google Scholar
Robinson, J. Y. (2022). Fungible citizenship: On the internet no-one knows you’re a Swede. M/C Journal, 25(2). https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2883RobinsonJ. Y.2022Fungible citizenship: On the internet no-one knows you’re a Swede252https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.2883Search in Google Scholar
Robinson, J. Y., & Enli, G. (2022). #MakeSwedenGreatAgain: Media events as politics in the deter-ritorialised nationalism debate. Nordic Journal of Media Studies, 4(1), 56–80. https://doi.org/10.2478/njms-2022-0004RobinsonJ. Y.EnliG.2022#MakeSwedenGreatAgain: Media events as politics in the deter-ritorialised nationalism debate415680https://doi.org/10.2478/njms-2022-0004Search in Google Scholar
Ross Arguedas, A., Robertson, C., Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. (2022). Echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarisation: A literature review. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford. https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:6e357e97-7b16-450a-a827-a92c93729a08Ross ArguedasA.RobertsonC.FletcherR.NielsenR.2022Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxfordhttps://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:6e357e97-7b16-450a-a827-a92c93729a08Search in Google Scholar
Ryan, A. (2022). How negative out-party affect influenced public attitudes about the coronavirus crisis in Norway. Frontiers in Political Science, 4, Article 944783. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.944783RyanA.2022How negative out-party affect influenced public attitudes about the coronavirus crisis in Norway4Article 944783. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.944783Search in Google Scholar
Ryan, A. (2023). Exploring differences in affective polarization between the Nordic countries. Scandinavian Political Studies, 46(1–2), 52–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12244RyanA.2023Exploring differences in affective polarization between the Nordic countries461–25274https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.12244Search in Google Scholar
Sandberg, L. A., & Ihlebæk, K. A. (2019). Start sharing the news: Exploring the link between right-wing alternative media and social media during the Swedish 2018 election. Statsvetenskaplig tidskrift, 121(3).SandbergL. A.IhlebækK. A.2019Start sharing the news: Exploring the link between right-wing alternative media and social media during the Swedish 2018 election1213Search in Google Scholar
Schoenmueller, V., Netzer, O., & Stahl, F. (2022). Frontiers: Polarized America: From political polarization to preference polarization. Marketing Science, 42(1), 48–60. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2022.1408SchoenmuellerV.NetzerO.StahlF.2022Frontiers: Polarized America: From political polarization to preference polarization4214860https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.2022.1408Search in Google Scholar
Skogerbø, E., Bruns, A., Quodling, A., & Ingebretsen, T. (2016). Agenda-setting revisited: Social media and sourcing in mainstream journalism. In A. Bruns, G. Enli, E. Skogerbø, A. O. Larsson, & C. Christensen (Eds.), The Routledge companion to social media and politics (pp. 104–120). Routledge.SkogerbøE.BrunsA.QuodlingA.IngebretsenT.2016Agenda-setting revisited: Social media and sourcing in mainstream journalismInBrunsA.EnliG.SkogerbøE.LarssonA. O.ChristensenC.(Eds.),104120RoutledgeSearch in Google Scholar
Skogerbø, E., Kristensen, N. N., Nord, L., & Ihlen, Ø. (2021). Introduction: A Nordic model for political communication? In E. Skogerbø, Ø. Ihlen, N. N. Kristensen, & L. Nord (Eds.), Power, communication, and politics in the Nordic countries (pp. 13–27). Nordicom, University of Gothenburg. https://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-1SkogerbøE.KristensenN. N.NordL.IhlenØ.2021Introduction: A Nordic model for political communication?InSkogerbøE.IhlenØ.KristensenN. N.NordL.(Eds.),1327Nordicom, University of Gothenburghttps://doi.org/10.48335/9789188855299-1Search in Google Scholar
Sloan, L., & Morgan, J. (2015). Who tweets with their location? Understanding the relationship between demographic characteristics and the use of geoservices and geotagging on Twitter. PloS one, 10(11), e0142209. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142209SloanL.MorganJ.2015Who tweets with their location? Understanding the relationship between demographic characteristics and the use of geoservices and geotagging on Twitter1011e0142209http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0142209Search in Google Scholar
Steppat, D., Castro Herrero, L., & Esser, F. (2022). Selective exposure in different political information environments – how media fragmentation and polarization shape congruent news use. European Journal of Communication, 37(1), 82–102. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231211012141SteppatD.Castro HerreroL.EsserF.2022Selective exposure in different political information environments – how media fragmentation and polarization shape congruent news use37182102https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231211012141Search in Google Scholar
Stroud, N. J. (2010). Polarization and partisan selective exposure. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 556–576. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.xStroudN. J.2010Polarization and partisan selective exposure603556576https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01497.xSearch in Google Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. (2007). Republic.Com 2.0. Princeton University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7tbswSunsteinC. R.2007Princeton University Presshttp://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7tbswSearch in Google Scholar
Syvertsen, T., Enli, G., Mjøs, O. J., & Moe, H. (2014). The media welfare state: Nordic media in the digital era. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/nmw.12367206.0001.001SyvertsenT.EnliG.MjøsO. J.MoeH.2014University of Michigan Presshttps://doi.org/10.3998/nmw.12367206.0001.001Search in Google Scholar
Thorson, K., & Wells, C. (2016). Curated flows: A framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age. Communication Theory, 26(3), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12087ThorsonK.WellsC.2016Curated flows: A framework for mapping media exposure in the digital age263309328https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12087Search in Google Scholar
Trilling, D., Tolochko, P., & Burscher, B. (2017). From newsworthiness to shareworthiness: How to predict news sharing based on article characteristics. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(1), 38–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016654682TrillingD.TolochkoP.BurscherB.2017From newsworthiness to shareworthiness: How to predict news sharing based on article characteristics9413860https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016654682Search in Google Scholar
Tripodi, T., & Potocky-Tripodi, M. (2006). Intranational research. In T. Tripodi, & M. Potocky-Tripodi (Eds.), International social work research: Issues and prospects (pp. 105–131). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195187250.001.0001TripodiT.Potocky-TripodiM.2006Intranational researchInTripodiT.Potocky-TripodiM.(Eds.),105131Oxford University Presshttps://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195187250.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Twitter Engineering [X Engineering]. (2015, November 16). Evaluating language identification performance [Blog post]. https://blog.twitter.com/engineering/en_us/a/2015/evaluating-language-identification-performanceTwitter Engineering [X Engineering]2015November16https://blog.twitter.com/engineering/en_us/a/2015/evaluating-language-identification-performanceSearch in Google Scholar
Urman, A. (2020). Context matters: Political polarization on Twitter from a comparative perspective. Media, Culture & Society, 42(6), 857–879. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719876541UrmanA.2020Context matters: Political polarization on Twitter from a comparative perspective426857879https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443719876541Search in Google Scholar
van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v1i1.70van DijckJ.PoellT.2013Understanding social media logic11214https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v1i1.70Search in Google Scholar
Vliegenthart, R., Boomgaarden, H. G., Van Aelst, P., & de Vreese, C. H. (2010). Covering the US presidential election in western Europe: A cross-national. Acta Politica, 45(4), 444–467. https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2010.2VliegenthartR.BoomgaardenH. G.Van AelstP.de VreeseC. H.2010Covering the US presidential election in western Europe: A cross-national454444467https://doi.org/10.1057/ap.2010.2Search in Google Scholar
Wall, M. (2015). Citizen journalism: A retrospective on what we know, an agenda for what we don’t. Digital Journalism, 3(6), 797–813. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.1002513WallM.2015Citizen journalism: A retrospective on what we know, an agenda for what we don’t36797813https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.1002513Search in Google Scholar
Ward, A. F., Zheng, J., & Broniarczyk, S. M. (2022). I share, therefore i know? Sharing online content – even without reading it – inflates subjective knowledge. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 33(3), 469–488. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1321WardA. F.ZhengJ.BroniarczykS. M.2022I share, therefore i know? Sharing online content – even without reading it – inflates subjective knowledge333469488https://doi.org/10.1002/jcpy.1321Search in Google Scholar
Webster, J. G. (2005). Beneath the veneer of fragmentation: Television audience polarization in a multichannel world. Journal of Communication, 55(2), 366–382.WebsterJ. G.2005Beneath the veneer of fragmentation: Television audience polarization in a multichannel world552366382Search in Google Scholar
Webster, J. G., & Ksiazek, T. B. (2012). The dynamics of audience fragmentation: Public attention in an age of digital media. Journal of Communication, 62(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01616.xWebsterJ. G.KsiazekT. B.2012The dynamics of audience fragmentation: Public attention in an age of digital media6213956https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01616.xSearch in Google Scholar
Webster, J. G., Phalen, P. F., & Lichty, L. W. (2006). Ratings analysis: The theory and practice of audience research. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.WebsterJ. G.PhalenP. F.LichtyL. W.2006Lawrence Erlbaum AssociatesSearch in Google Scholar
Weeks, B. E., Ksiazek, T. B., & Holbert, R. L. (2016). Partisan enclaves or shared media experiences? A network approach to understanding citizens’ political news environments. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 60(2), 248–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2016.1164170WeeksB. E.KsiazekT. B.HolbertR. L.2016Partisan enclaves or shared media experiences? A network approach to understanding citizens’ political news environments602248268https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2016.1164170Search in Google Scholar
Wojcik, S., & Hughes, A. (2019). Sizing up Twitter users. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/WojcikS.HughesA.2019Pew Research Centerhttps://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/Search in Google Scholar
Wong, F. M. F., Tan, C. W., Sen, S., & Chiang, M. (2016). Quantifying political leaning from tweets, retweets, and retweeters. IEEE transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 28(8), 2158–2172. https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2016.2553667WongF. M. F.TanC. W.SenS.ChiangM.2016Quantifying political leaning from tweets, retweets, and retweeters28821582172https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2016.2553667Search in Google Scholar