1887
Volume 31, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

En el presente trabajo proponemos un acercamiento cuantitativo al discurso político en la red de Twitter. El objetivo principal de esta investigación consistió en determinar algunos de los factores que pueden estar influyendo en la percepción del lenguaje político en esta red. El análisis estadístico de los datos recogidos, a partir de 100 tuits y 100 encuestados, permitió evidenciar que las variables ( = 0,0081) y ( < 0.0001) están relacionadas significativamente con el de los tuits. Asimismo, el ( = 0,0186) está relacionado con el (MLP) de los tuits, si bien el modelo explica solo un leve porcentaje de la variabilidad.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15060.seg
2018-08-27
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Applee Tree Communications
    Applee Tree Communications (2011) “Twitteroscopio #0.2: edición especial elecciones generales 2011”. Applee Tree Communications. Disponible en: www.appletreecommunications.com/es/social-media-lab. Última consulta: 06/03/2015.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bruns, A., & Burgess, J.
    (2011) #ausvotes: “How Twitter covered the 2010 Australian federal election”. Communication, Politics & Culture, 44(2), 37–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bruns, A., & Stieglitz, S.
    (2012) Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 30(3–4).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bradley, M. M., Greenwald, M. K., Petry, M. C., & Lang, P. J.
    (1992) Remembering pictures: Pleasure and arousal in memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 18(2), 379–390.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Christensen, C.
    (2011) Twitter revolutions? Addressing social media and dissent. Communication Review, 14(3), 155–157.10.1080/10714421.2011.597235
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2011.597235 [Google Scholar]
  6. Christianson, Sven-Åke; Elizabeth, F., & Loftus, E.
    (1990) Some characteristics of people’s traumatic memories. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society. September 1990, Volume28, Issue3, pp195–198.10.3758/BF03334001
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334001 [Google Scholar]
  7. Christianson, S. A.
    (1992) Emotional stress and eyewitness memory: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 112(2), 284–309.10.1037/0033‑2909.112.2.284
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.2.284 [Google Scholar]
  8. Conover, M. D., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Gonalves, B., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F.
    (2011) Political polarization on Twitter. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. AAAI Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Deller, R.
    (2011) Twittering on: Audience research and participation using Twitter. Participations, 8(1). Disponible enwww.participations.org/Volume%208/Issue%201/deller.htm
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Escandell Vidal, M. Victoria
    (2011) Verum focus y prosodia: cuando la duración (sí que) importa”. Proyecto Semántica Procedimental y Contenido Explícito II (SPYCE II). Disponible enportal.uned.es, 22/05/2015,
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Hamann, S. B.
    (2001) Cognitive and neural mechanisms of emotional memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5(9), 394–400.10.1016/S1364‑6613(00)01707‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(00)01707-1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Lindquist, K. A., Satpute, A. B., & Gendron, M.
    (2015) Does language do more than communicate emotion?Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 99–108.10.1177/0963721414553440
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721414553440 [Google Scholar]
  13. López García, A.
    (1985) Introducción a la gramática liminar. Boletín de la Academia Puertorriqueña de la Lengua Española 1985, 77–97.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (1994) Categorías y funciones en la percepción de la oración. EnF. Hernández Paricio (Ed.), Perspectivas sobre la oración (185–204). Universidad de Zaragoza.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lupyan, G., & Ward, E. J.
    (2013) Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 110, 14196–14201.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Mancera Rueda, A. & Pano Alamán, A.
    (2013) Nuevas dinámicas discursivas en la comunicación Política en Twitter, enCírculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación. Universidad de Sevilla y Università di Bologna, 56, 53–80.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Peregrino, S. F., Tomás, D., & Llopis, F.
    (2013) Una aproximación basada en corpus para la detección del foco geográfico en el texto. A corpus-based approach to geographical focus detection in text. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural. Vol.50, 69–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Schacter, D. L.
    (1996) Searching for memory: The brain, the mind, and the past. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Sperber, D. & Wilson, D.
    (1986a) Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. (Second edition 1995)
    [Google Scholar]
  20. (1995) Postface to the second edition of Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Silvey, C., Kirby, S., & Smith, K.
    (2015) Word meanings evolve to selectively preserve distinctions on salient dimensions. Cognitive Science, 39, 212–226. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12150
    https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12150 [Google Scholar]
  22. Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T., Sandner, P., & Welpe, L.
    (2010) Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Proceedings of the Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2011) Election forecasts with Twitter: How 140 characters reflect the political landscape. Social Science Computer Review, 29(4), 402–418.10.1177/0894439310386557
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439310386557 [Google Scholar]
  24. Twitter, Inc. Company (s.f.)
    Twitter, Inc. Company (s.f.). Disponible enhttps://about.twitter.com/company
  25. Van Dijk, Teun A.
    (2009) Relevance assignment in discourse comprehension. Discourse processes, Vol.2, Issue2 1979 Edición digital, consultada el27/05/2015www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01638537909544458
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Yardi, S., & Boyd, D.
    (2010) Dynamic debates: An analysis of group polarization over time on twitter. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 20, 1–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Zhang, M. y Ye, X.
    (2008) A generation model to unify topic relevance and lexicon-based sentiment for opinion retrieval. ACM SIGIR 2008, 411–418
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Zubizarreta, M.ª L.
    (1999) Las funciones informativas: tema y foco. EnI. Bosque, I. y V. Demonte, V. (Dirs.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (capítulo 64). Madrid: Espasa-Calpe.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15060.seg
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15060.seg
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error