oa Computational observation

References

1. Ahmadi, M., & Wohn, D. Y.(2018). The antecedents of incidental news exposure on social media. Social Media + Society, 4(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118772827
   [Google Scholar]
2. Anderson, A. A., Brossard, D., Scheufele, D. A., Xenos, M. A., & Ladwig, P.(2014). The “nasty effect:” Online incivility and risk perceptions of emerging technologies. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(3), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12009
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bodó, B., Helberger, N., Irion, K., Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J., Möller, J., van de Velde, B., … de Vreese, C. H.(2018). Tackling the algorithmic control crisis - the technical, legal, and ethical challenges of research into algorithmic agents. Yale Journal of Law and Technology, 19(1), 133–180.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Bozdag, E.(2013). Bias in algorithmic filtering and personalization. Ethics and Information Technology, 15(3), 209–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-013-9321-6
   [Google Scholar]
5. Diakopoulos, N.(2014). Algorithmic accountability. Journalistic investigation of computational power structures. Digital Journalism, 3(3), 398–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.976411
   [Google Scholar]
6. Eslami, M., Rickman, A., Vaccaro, K., Aleyasen, A., Vuong, A., Karahalios, K., … Sandvig, C.(2015). “I always assumed that i wasn’t really that close to [her]”: Reasoning about invisible algorithms in news feeds. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’15, 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702556
   [Google Scholar]
7. European Parliament, & Council of the European Union. Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)., (2016).
   [Google Scholar]
8. Freelon, D.(2018). Computational research in the post-API age. Political Communication, 35(4), 665–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1477506
   [Google Scholar]
9. Gedeshi, I., Zulehner, P. M., Faradov, T., Rotman, D. G., Swyngedouw, Marc (Flanders), Fotev, G., … European Values Study Group. (2010). European Values Study 2008: Integrated dataset (EVS 2008) [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.4232/1.10059
   [Google Scholar]
10. Guess, A. M.(2015). Measure for measure: An experimental test of online political media exposure. Political Analysis, 23(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu010
    [Google Scholar]
11. Guess, A. M., Munger, K., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J.(2018). How accurate are survey responses on social media and politics?Political Communication, 0(0), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1504840
    [Google Scholar]
12. Haenschen, K.(2019). Self-reported versus digitally recorded: Measuring political activity on Facebook. Social Science Computer Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318813586
    [Google Scholar]
13. Haim, M., Graefe, A., & Brosius, H.-B.(2016). The burst of the bubble? Effects of automated personalization on news diversity. Paper presented at the 65th meeting of the International Communication Association presented at the Fukuoka. Fukuoka.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Haim, M., Kümpel, A. S., & Brosius, H.-B.(2018). Popularity cues in online media: A review of conceptualizations, operationalizations, and general effects. Studies in Communication and Media, 7(2), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.5771/2192-4007-2018-2-58
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hasebrink, U., & Popp, J.(2006). Media repertoires as a result of selective media use. A conceptual approach to the analysis of patterns of exposure. Communications, 31(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun.2006.023
    [Google Scholar]
16. Jürgens, P., Stark, B., & Magin, M.(2019). Two half-truths make a whole? On bias in self-reports and tracking data. Social Science Computer Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319831643
    [Google Scholar]
17. Kalogeropoulos, A., & Newman, N.(2017). “I saw the news on Facebook”: Brand attribution when accessing news from distributed environments. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Kim, S. J.(2014). A repertoire approach to cross-platform media use behavior. New Media & Society, 18(3), 353–372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543162
    [Google Scholar]
19. Kümpel, A. S.(2018). The issue takes it all? Incidental news exposure and news engagement on Facebook. Digital Journalism, 5(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1465831
    [Google Scholar]
20. Leiner, D.(2014). Convenience samples from online respondent pools: A case study of the SoSci Panel. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259669050
    [Google Scholar]
21. Menchen-Trevino, E.(2016). Web Historian: Enabling multi-method and independent research with real-world web browsing history data. IConference 2016 Proceedings. Presented at the iConference 2016, Philadelphia, PA. https://doi.org/10.9776/16611
    [Google Scholar]
22. Microsoft. (2017, August 2). Porting an extension from Chrome to Microsoft Edge. Retrieved November 13, 2018, from https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/extensions/guides/porting-chrome-extensions
    [Google Scholar]
23. Möller, J., van de Velde, R. N., Merten, L., & Puschmann, C.(2019). Explaining online news engagement based on browsing behavior: Creatures of habit?Social Science Computer Review. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319828012
    [Google Scholar]
24. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K.(2018). Digital news report 2018. Retrieved from media.digitalnewsreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/digital-news-report-2018.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
25. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K.(2016). Digital news report 2016. Retrieved from reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Digital-News-Report-2016.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
26. Price, V., & Zaller, J.(1993). Who gets the news? Alternative measures of news reception and their implications for research. Public Opinion Quarterly, 57(2), 133–164. https://doi.org/10.1086/269363
    [Google Scholar]
27. Prior, M.(2009). The immensely inflated news audience: Assessing bias in self-reported news exposure. Public Opinion Quarterly, 73(1), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfp002
    [Google Scholar]
28. Reinecke, L., & Hofmann, W.(2016). Slacking off or winding down? An experience sampling study on the drivers and consequences of media use for recovery versus procrastination. Human Communication Research, 42(3), 441–461. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12082
    [Google Scholar]
29. Revilla, M., Ochoa, C., & Loewe, G.(2017). Using passive data from a meter to complement survey data in order to study online behavior. Social Science Computer Review, 35(4), 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316638457
    [Google Scholar]
30. Roßteutscher, S., Schmitt-Beck, R., Schoen, H., Weßels, B., Wolf, C., Preißinger, M., … Gärtner, L.(2018). Wahlkampf-Panel 2017 (GLES) [Data set]. https://doi.org/10.4232/1.13150
    [Google Scholar]
31. Sax, L. J., Gilmartin, S. K., & Bryant, A. N.(2003). Assessing response rates and nonresponse bias in web and paper surveys. Research in Higher Education, 44(4), 409–432. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024232915870
    [Google Scholar]
32. Scharkow, M.(2016). The accuracy of self-reported internet use—a validation study using client log data. Communication Methods and Measures, 10(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2015.1118446
    [Google Scholar]
33. Struckmann, S., & Karnowski, V.(2016). News consumption in a changing media ecology: An MESM-study on mobile news. Telematics and Informatics, 33(2), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.08.012
    [Google Scholar]
34. Taneja, H., Webster, J. G., Malthouse, E. C., & Ksiazek, T. B.(2012). Media consumption across platforms: Identifying user-defined repertoires. New Media & Society, 14(6), 951–968. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811436146
    [Google Scholar]
35. van Aelst, P., Strömbäck, J., Aalberg, T., Esser, F., de Vreese, C. H., Matthes, J., … Stanyer, J.(2017). Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy?Annals of the International Communication Association, 41(1), 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2017.1288551
    [Google Scholar]
36. van Atteveldt, W., & Peng, T.-Q.(2018). When Communication Meets Computation: Opportunities, Challenges, and Pitfalls in Computational Communication Science. Communication Methods and Measures, 12(2–3), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1458084
    [Google Scholar]
37. Wallach, H.(2016). Computational social science: Toward a collaborative future. In R. M.Alvarez (Ed.), Computational Social Science (pp. 307–316). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316257340.014
    [Google Scholar]
38. 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.x
    [Google Scholar]
39. Wolfsfeld, G., Yarchi, M., & Samuel-Azran, T.(2016). Political information repertoires and political participation. New Media & Society, 18(9), 2096–2115. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815580413
    [Google Scholar]
40. Zuiderveen Borgesius, F. J., Trilling, D., Möller, J., Balázs, B., de Vreese, C. H., & Helberger, N.(2016). Should we worry about filter bubbles?Internet Policy Review, 5(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401
    [Google Scholar]