2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences

A Systematic Literature Review of Twitter Research

from a Socio-Political Revolution Perspective

Ricardo Buettner 1 and Katharina Buettner 1 , 2

1 FOM University of Applied Sciences, Institute of Management & Information Systems, Munich, Germany
ricardo.buettner@fom.de
2 PULS GmbH, Munich, Germany
katharina.buettner@yahoo.de

Abstract of the internet and especially the evolution of social

From a socio-political revolution perspective we
review Twitter-related literature included in top peer-
reviewed journals and conferences, and build up a
comprehensive picture. Based on this we identify em-
pirical and design-oriented research needs.
1. Introduction
Oh et al. [1] demonstrated that Twitter was used
heavily for “collective sense making ... maintain[ing]
situational awareness during the unstable political
situation” during the 2011 Egypt revolution [1, 210].
Our work evaluates Oh’s [1] results concerning Twitter
usage for collective sense making and maintaining
situational awareness for other revolutions and extends
it by using Kuran’s theory [2] of (unanticipated) po-
litical revolution. We use Goldstone’s contemporary
definition of revolution as “an effort to transform the
political institutions and the justifications for political
authority in a society, accompanied by formal or infor-
mal mass mobilization and noninstitutionalized actions
that undermine existing authorities.” [3, p. 142].
Twitter is the world’s second most established social
media platform after Facebook. Compared to other
social media platforms, Twitter offers a rich spectrum
of publicly available data containing profiles, up to 140
character messages (tweets), and following-follower
network information. Besides the very popular private-
and business-oriented use of Twitter and due to the
generally public but time-limited availability of most
data, Twitter offers a rich resource for research (cf.
Twitter API).
Long before the advent of the internet, Kuran specu-
lated that “television, for instance, could alter people’s
political preferences by enhancing their awareness of
how other societies are governed” [2, p. 53]. The rise
media outpaced this speculation. However, Kuran’s
theory of (unanticipated) political revolution and the
role of communication tools is very relevant in order
to understand the power of social media such as Twitter
within political revolutions. At the same time, it must
be clear that Twitter does not lead the revolution.
Rather Twitter is a tool effectively connecting people
within a complex and non-linear social fabric (see for
example the debate of Tumasjan et al. and Jungherr et
al. [4]–[6]).
That is why – following the research call of various
Information Systems (IS) scholars (e.g. [1]) – in this
article we review all existing “substantial” scientific
Twitter work related to the socio-political revolution
perspective and build up a comprehensive literature
review following Kuran’s theory [2]. Based on this
review we identify empirically evaluable propositions
and design-oriented research needs to stimulate future
research on the theoretical progress of understanding
the role of Twitter within socio-political revolutions
and Twitter’s functionality of information and commu-
nication facilities during revolutions.
RQ1 : What are the research needs for understanding
the Twitter usage phenomena during socio-political rev-
olutions?
RQ2 : What additional Twitter functionalities are us-
able during socio-political revolutions?
The paper is organized as follows: In section 2 we
present the research methodology. Section 3 contains
related work. Kuran’s theory of unanticipated political
revolution is sketched in section 4. The comprehensive
review including the particular empirical and design-
oriented research needs is presented in section 5.
In section 6 a compacted framework guiding future
research will be shown. Finally, the conclusion includ-
ing research limitations and future work is found in
section 7.

1530-1605/16 $31.00 © 2016 IEEE 2206

DOI 10.1109/HICSS.2016.277
2. Methodology
On the basis of a systematic literature analysis iden-
tifying Twitter-related socio-political revolution pub-
lications, respective research requirements to foster
Twitter usage studies will be identified. These needs
will be formulated in the form of particular proposi-
tions (Px ) and technology-/ design-oriented calls (Dx ).
On that basis a framework guiding future Twitter
research will be shown. The literature review body is
structured based on Kuran’s theory [2] of (unantici-
pated) political revolution.
2.1. Literature search strategy
In order to extract relevant research from the pub-
lished literature, a systematic literature search captur-
ing Twitter-related work from the beginning of 2006
until 06/01/2015 was undertaken. 18 meta-databases
(i.e. ACM DL, AIS Electronic Library, Cambridge
Journals, Emerald Online, IEEEXplore DL, INFORMS
Pub, JSTOR, Mary Ann Liebert, Palgrave Macmillan
Pub, SAGE, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink, and Swets
Inf. Serv., Taylor & Francis Online, WileyOnline, MIT
Press, ACS DL, PsycINFO) as well as the Journal of
MIS (JMIS) were searched, resulting in over 2.100
articles that met the inclusion criteria (abstract or title
or keywords contains “Twitter”.).
Publications that were not related to the social
network Twitter but related to birds/zoology etc. –
which regularly also include the word “Twitter” – were
removed from the database. In addition, a forward and
backward search was performed (cf. [7]).
2.2. Quality criteria for study identification
To ensure including only “substantial” scientific
crowdsourcing work in this review we only considered
international peer-reviewed publications (journal arti-
cles and transactions) with completed research work.
For reasons of quality, poster sessions, editorials, in-
terviews, commentaries, conference proceedings (with
the exception of ICIS, HICSS, ECIS, AMCIS), and
RIP papers were not included.
After reviewing 848 articles included in top journals
and conferences, 40 articles were identified as relevant
within the Political Revolution domain (considerably
addresses the political revolution area). The identifica-
tion was based on a manual decision by two reviewers
at a reliability of 98.8%.
2207
3. Related work
Nine years after the launching of Twitter, scholars
have contributed from different disciplines such as
Information Technology, Information Systems, Sociol-
ogy, Psychology, Philosophy, Politics, Communication
Studies, Business Studies, Law, Medicine, Geography,
Education Sciences, Administration Sciences, Journal-
ism, and Linguistics with empirical, technical/design-
oriented, and theoretical work. In addition, very
subject-specific Twitter reviews exist: Bruns & Burgess
[8] contained a small review on behavioral research
methods for Twitter. Efron [9] shows a literature sur-
vey of Twitter retrieval methods, e. g., for sentiment
analysis and opinion mining. Tiernan [10] reviewed
and discussed methodological points when designing
lectures incorporating Twitter. Wankel [11] gives an
overview of the use of the main social media platforms
(Facebook, blogs, YouTube, Twitter, MySpace, and
Second Life) in teaching. Ebner et al. [12] exper-
imentally investigated the use of the microblogging
platforms MBlog and MediaWiki within classrooms.
Arceneaux & Weiss [13] analyzed the press cover-
age and public responses to Twitter technology from
2006 through the first months of 2009. Richter &
Schäfermeyer [14] presented a very small overview
of case studies on social media marketing (four were
related to Twitter). A current state-of-the-art review
of overlapping domains of geographic-related sensor
techniques (Sensor Web, citizen sensing and ’human-
in-the-loop sensing’, etc.), and the roles of these
domains in environmental and public health surveil-
lance and crisis/disaster informatics can be found in
[15]. Dredze [16] offered a very short overview of
several studies concerning heath-related tweet-content
including his own recent work. Micieli & Micieli
[17] reviewed ophthalmology related peer-reviewed
literature for Twitter content. Smith and Lambert [18]
presented a small review of healthcare education.
Williams et al. [19] provided a documentation-oriented
overview. Zimmer and Proferes [20] reviewed Twitter
research concerning disciplines and methods. Last but
not least, danah m. boyd published a bibliography
(http://www.danah.org/researchBibs/twitter.php) of re-
search on Twitter and microblogging. However, a com-
prehensive review concerning the utilization of Twitter
within socio-political revolution processes is still open.
4. Kuran’s theory of unanticipated politi-
cal revolution
Kuran [2] has analyzed several political revolutions
(e.g., France 1789, Russia 1905/1917, Iran 1978/79)
and found a typical pattern of revolutionary stages (see [55]), 2011 Wisconsin labor protest (#wiunion, [56]),
figure 1). 2012 Israel Hamas (IDFSpokesperson, [57]), 2013
Brazil Vinegar (#vemprarua, #todarevolucaocomeca,
I. Discontent of ongoing preference [46]), 2013 Turkey (#OccupyGezi, [58]) in different
the mass falsification of the mass stages and with varied success (figure 2).
II. Inner tension of shift of the density of
Stages of revolution (Kuran 1989)
the individual private preferences
I II III IV V VI
the straw that breaks 2007 Wikileaks
III. Trigger event
the camel‘s back
2009 Austria student protest
IV. (Unanticipated) increase of magnitude
Revolution and revolutionary speed 2009 Toronto G20

V. Revolutionary guiding, suggesting, and 2010 Venezuela

Leadership threatening activities 2010 Germany Stuttgart21

VI. Post-revolution repression of would-be 2008/2009 Israel-Gaza

phase turncoats
Figure 1: Kuran’s six stages of
revolution; in accordance to [2].
According to Kuran’s theory, for a revolution to start
the majority of a population will be discontented with
their living conditions but suppress these feelings and
preferences. Over time some individuals feel such a
inner tension that “a relatively minor event makes a
few individuals reach their boiling point and take to the
streets in protest. This kicks off the latent revolutionary
bandwagon, and the opposition darts into power. The
magnitude and speed of the revolutionary process come
as an enormous surprise, precisely because the masses
had been concealing their growing frustrations” [2,
p. 60]. A very crucial point for a successful revolution
is the emergence of suitable leader(s) from the mass
and the repression of would-be turncoats.
5. Twitter usage during revolutions
Our review spans a wide range of initiated at-
tempts at socio-political revolution: 2007 Wikileaks
(#Wikileaks, [21]), 2009 Moldova (#pman, [22]), 2009
Austria student protest (#uni, #wien, #socialrevolu-
tion, [23]), 2009 Israel-Gaza [24]–[27], 2009 Iran
green revolution [28], 2010 Venezuela (#SOSInter-
netVE, [29]), 2010 Germany Stuttgart21 (#s21, [30]),
2009 Toronto G20 (#G20, #g20report, [31]–[33]), 2011
Egypt (#jan25, #egypt, #Tahrir, [1,34]–[42]), 2011
England (#Riots, #RiotsCleanup, #WitnessAppeal, [37,
43]–[45]), 2011 US Occupy movement (#occupythe-
world, #OccupyWallStreet, #ows, [38,46]–[53]), 2011
Spain Indignados (#notenemosmiedo, #nolesvotes,
#15m, #spanishrevolution, [38,46,46]–[51,54]), 2011
Greece Aganaktismenoi movements (#greekrevolution,
#ayfagakalk, [51]), 2011 Italy (#15ott, #15oct, #15o,
2009 Iran green revolution
2009 Moldova
2011 Egypt
2012 Israel Hamas
2013 Brazil Vinegar
2011 England
2011 US Occupy movement
2011 Spain Indignados
2011 Greece Aganaktismenoi
2011 Italy
2011 Wisconsin labor protest
2013 Turkey
Figure 2: Investigated revolu-
tions; stages in accordance to [2].
5.1. Twitter usage during revolutions from the
perspective of Kuran’s theory
It was found that most of the literature is related
to stages II to V. The reason for that is the fact that
Twitter is mainly used in these stages. For instance,
Lysenko and Desouza [22] investigated the role of
social networking sites in Moldova’s Revolution of
April 2009 and found that Twitter was mostly used
during the later phases of the revolution within the
active street protests and the subsequent information
war and for communication about the conflict.
5.1.1. Discontent of the mass (I.). There are no
specific Twitter revolution studies focusing on stage
I. However, a large body of literature concerning sen-
timent analysis exists, e.g. [4,59]–[62]. For instance,

2208
Jamal et al. [39] analyzed Twitter discourses and
proposed a method to detect subtle sentiment within
the mass (e.g. anti-Americanism). That is why we
formulate the following design need:
D1 : There is a design need for sophisticated sen-
timent detection in order to extend Twit-
ter functionality for socio-political revolution
purposes.
5.1.2. Inner tension of the individual (II.). There
are more studies focusing on stage II. Passini [63]
discussed the so-called Twitter revolutions in the light
of social psychology theories, especially the tensional
relationship between disobedience and democracy. It is
known from psychology that high inner tension is as-
sociated with joking [64,65]. Interestingly, some schol-
ars report increased (curious) joking rates on Twitter
associated with the high inner tension of individuals.
For instance: “Deleting Dictator...Deleting Installation
files...Some files could not be removed. Country still
being used...Aborted. #Egypt #Mubarak” [41, p. 277].
Choudhary et al. [36] also show that during the 2011
Egypt protests humor was often used.
In addition some scholars proposed methods to auto-
matically analyze inner tensions. For instance, Burnap
et al. [66] demonstrated the possibility of forecasting
spikes in social tension via Twitter. Thorpe and Ahmad
[26] revealed indications of inner tension in some
individuals from a grassroots parkour group living in
Gaza.
At the end of stage II a specific trigger event
constitutes the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
5.1.3. Trigger event (III.). Kuran [2] found that in
every revolution of historical significance a trigger
event occurred. This trigger event was also found in
more recent revolution (attempts) [67]. For instance,
within the Gaza conflict the Israeli Air Force (IAF)
began a massive bombardment of Hamas targets in the
Gaza Strip on December 27, 2008, at approximately
11:30 a.m. (Israeli time) [27]. The 2011 Wisconsin
labor protests were triggered by the announcement on
February 11, 2011 of Governor Scott Walker’s inten-
tion to strip about 175,000 public employees of their
collective bargaining rights [56]. The shooting dead
of Mark Duncon in Tottenham, London on August
4th 2011 was the trigger event for the 2011 London
riots [43]. The 2013 Vinegar Brazil protests were
initially sparked by opposition to bus and underground
fare rises in June 2013 [46]. On 10 April 2013, the
hashtag #ayfagakalk (“stand up” in English) appeared
on Twitter, which was related to the plan for the
2209
destruction of the historic public Gezi Park in Istanbul
in order to build a shopping mall [58].
The transition from stage III to IV is characterized
by consensus about the credibility of a alleged socio-
political relevant incident which potentially triggers
a subsequent mass movement. Procter et al. [44]
described the phenomenon during the 2011 riots in
England as follows: “A rumour starts with someone
tweeting about the occurrence of an alleged incident.
The rumour gets retweeted... Others begin to challenge
its credibility... A consensus begins to emerge...” [44,
p. 207]. The touchstone if a mass movement emerges
is based on the credibility of the alleged incident and
the consensus about its socio-political relevance. When
it turns out that the alleged incident did not occur
or reporting about it has been partially manipulated
(e.g. faked images of the burning London Eye during
the 2011 riots [44], cf. [68]) the motivation of the
masses recedes and the movement ends. Gleason [48]
demonstrated by the example of the 2011 Occupy
Wall Street protests that “Twitter supports multiple
opportunities for participation in the Occupy move-
ment – from creating, tagging, and sharing content to
reading, watching, and following a hashtag – which
may facilitate learners becoming more informed, en-
gaged citizens” [p. 966] [48]. Park et al. [49] revealed
a “loosely connected hub-and-spoke network” of the
2011 Occupy Wall Street activists. Wang et al. [69]
also analyzed the 2011 Occupy Wall Street protests
and found that the arguments of those who initiated it
were very unstable which indicates a low credibility.
As a consequence a counterpublic emerged [50]. Sim-
ilar weak and inconsistent arguments were observed
during the 2010 Toronto G20 protests, resulting in
a open criticism of the protests [32,33]. Earl et al.
[31] analyzed the 2009 Pittsburgh G20 movement and
found that Twitter created “a new dynamic in protester
and police interaction toward information symmetries”
[31, p. 459]. Also the 2011 Spanish protests dissipated
for the same reasons [51]. Against this background we
formulate:
P1 : High credibility of an alleged incident is a
precondition for starting a mass movement.
In addition to the high credibility of the incident
its socio-political relevance has to be high in order to
mobilize the masses. Various examples show revolu-
tion imitators trying to trigger a protest by copying
arguments. For example, González-Bailón [38] identi-
fied the 2011 Spanish wave of protests as “a step in
the sequence of events that went from the Arab Spring
in the MENA region at the beginning of 2011 to the
global Occupy movement” [38, p. 950]. That is why in
the case of the 2011 Spanish protests the movement
also fails. The same was observed by Vicari [55] for
the 2011 Italy polycentric protest for global change.
We formulate:
P2 : High socio-political relevance of an alleged
incident is a precondition for starting a mass
movement.
5.1.4. (Unanticipated) revolution (IV.). Tweets like
“#Egypt’s street awakening tomorrow #Jan25 #Rev-
olution” [41, p. 277] or “Egypt is about to have a
Facebook revolution” [41, p. 277] reopen and drive
the unanticipated revolution. In this stage, the high
speed of connecting people via Twitter drives the rev-
olution. For example, Maireder and Schwarzenegger
[23] analyzed the #unibrennt hashtagged tweets of the
occupation of Vienna’s largest lecture hall by students
in October 2009. The grounded theory-based analysis
[70] revealed that the low-obligatory and low-binding
nature of Twitter use, and the immediacy of connection
between the movement members were fundamental for
its success.
Later, when the mainstream media began reporting
the protests attained greater visibility. The greater vis-
ibility and ongoing internet functionality is important
to move the masses. Unfortunately some regimes shut
down internet access or manipulate its content [57,71].
However, the visibility of the activists is important
in order to draw support from various actors. For
instance, Bruns et al. [35] demonstrated supportive
interactions concerning protests and unrest in countries
from Tunisia to Syria during 2011 Arab Spring. Severo
and Zuolo [42] showed that the 2011 Arab Spring was
also supported by Egyptian migrants living in Europe
(# right2vote). Tonkin et al. [45] investigated 600,000
tweets concerning the riots in London and other British
cities in August 2011 and found evidence that Twitter
was used as a central organizational tool to promote
illegal group action. Results also showed that Twitter
users retweeted mostly to demonstrate support for their
beliefs in others’ comments. Jungherr and Jürgens [30]
showed that during the 2010 German Stuttgart 21
movement Twitter was largely used for tactical support.
It is also interesting that successful mass movements
are characterized by their success in getting support
from people not directly affected by the revolution. For
instance, Aday et al. [34] revealed that the majority of
attention to the Arab Spring via Twitter came from
outside the Middle East and North Africa (MENA)
regions.
5.1.5. Revolutionary leadership (V.). It is crucial for
the success of a revolution that the masses are coordi-
2210
nated by (a hierarchy of) leaders. That is why within
this stage, tweets become more personal and emotive
[41]. Not only do tweets become more personal and
emotive [41] during this stage, but an interesting recent
Twitter experiment by Coppock et al. [72] revealed
that private messages to followers have the most effect
in terms of mobilizing people. In contrast, public
tweets had no effect. This direct approach is particulary
important since leadership via Twitter means leading
from a (physical) distance.
In addition, information selection plays an important
role. For instance, Oh et al. [25] analyzed Twitter data
on the Israel-Gaza conflict between December 27th
2008 to January 18th 2009. According to Oh et al. [25],
“Twitter users are conceptualized as the ’gated’ who
play an active role in selecting and distributing news
sources through their Twitter messages” [25, p. 1]. The
concept of gatekeeping for information control was
introduced by Barzilai-Nahon [73]–[75] and also plays
an important role in terms of leadership during revolu-
tions by information selection. For instance, Meraz and
Papacharissi [40] places emphasis on news framing and
its relevance to sociocultural context in order to lead
the masses during the 2011 Egypt revolution.
As described above in this stage it is crucial for a
successful revolution that suitable leader(s) from the
mass can be identified [2]. Some scholars proposed
approaches for this. For instance, Kardara et al. [76]
proposed a framework to identify leaders within a
Twitter group. Räbiger and Spiliopoulou [77] demon-
strated an approach to separate the influencers from
the non-influencers and Part [78] found that Twitter
opinion leadership impacts an individuals’ involvement
in political processes.
Since all the above reported specific findings on
Twitter-based leadership are well-known from the per-
spective of the problem of general leadership from a
distance, which is well documented in the human re-
sources literature [79,80], we consequently formulate:
P3 : Twitter-based leadership during a revolution
does not significantly differ from general lead-
ership from a distance.
In addition, various scholars focused on visionary
leaders within successful revolutions [21,81]. For ex-
ample, Lindgren and Lundström [21] analyzed Twit-
ter activity under the #WikiLeaks hashtag and found
that movements have a common language, agreed
definitions of the situation and a shared vision. We
formulate:
P4 : Transformational leadership style is positively
associated with the success of a revolution.
Furthermore, within the revolutionary leadership
stage the demand for information is high due to the
coordination requirements. The results of Kwon et al.
[24] also confirm this general finding for Twitter use.
The leadership structure is regularly very complex,
for instance, Morales et al. [29] described, based on
complexity science, the structure and dynamics of
a Twitter network involved in the 2010 Venezuelan
protests. Results showed a community structure with
highly connected hubs and three different kinds of
user behavior determining information flows. If this
coordination complexity can not be managed, the
movement becomes lost. For example, Theocharis et al.
[51] demonstrated a lack of coordination tweets within
the failed 2011 Spanish protests.
Sandoval-Almazan and Gil-Garcia [67] analyzed
social media usage for political activism and social
movements and identified “a trend towards a more
integrated use of social media tools and applications”.
In more detail, Sandoval-Almazan and Gil-Garcia [67]
emphasized an intensive usage of Twitter for coordi-
nation problems between the players (humans, media,
organizations, etc.). In addition, Zeitzoff [27] investi-
gated the Gaza Conflict (2008-2009) via Twitter data
to capture the micro-dynamics of the conflict and
also revealed a complex coordination dynamic. Con-
sidering these complex relationships, the simultaneity
constraints, and the task/sub-task dependencies of the
revolution process [29,47,52,54], the current state of
the solution of the underlying “coordination problem”
[82] by information and communication technologies
still fails. The coordination problem refers to the
management of “dependencies between activities” [83,
p. 90]. That is why we call for a strong interdisciplinary
study of the underlying coordination problem in socio-
political revolution activities following Malone and
Crowston [83] and formulate:
P5 : The usage of Twitter during a revolution is
rooted in a strong coordination problem.
From a design science perspective scholars built
initial IT artefacts in order to deal with the coordination
problem. For instance, Purohit et al. [84] demon-
strated an interesting approach to matching seekers
and suppliers during social critical phases. Tang et al.
[85] demonstrated an approach to effectively identify
target groups for communications (seeker). To proceed
with more sophisticated coordination mechanisms we
formulate the following design need:
D2 : There is a design need for a sophisticated co-
ordination mechanism based on the analysis-
synthesis concept in order to extend Twit-
ter functionality for socio-political revolution
purposes.
2211
The analysis-synthesis concept [86] comprises (a)
the decomposition of the main task (goal) into sub-
tasks delegable to people and (b) the synthesis of sub-
tasks results in order to reach the superior goal. For
example: The complex task of playing a music title has
to be broken down into sub-tasks such as playing spe-
cific musical instruments by musicians (analysis part).
The conductor is responsible for the orchestration of
the musicians (synthesis part).
5.1.6. Post-revolution phase (VI.). In this stage the
repression of would-be turncoats initiated due to new
rumors is important. Please note that Doer et al. [37]
found that rumors spread much more quickly in Twitter
than in other network topologies. It only needs the
interaction of a few nodes to increase the speed.
That is why rumor-spreading detection and prevention
systems are needed. Scholars initially sketched such
systems, e.g., Tripathy et al. [87] studied models and
metrics for anti-rumor processes to counter rumor on
Twitter. Miyabe et al. [88] demonstrated an approach to
prevent rumor-spreading on Twitter. However, in order
to detect rumor more reliably at an early stage we
recommend combining existing work on trend identi-
fication [89]–[95] and geo-located [96] event detection
[97]–[100] and formulate the following design need:
D3 : There is a design need for sophisticated rumor
detection in order to extend Twitter function-
ality for socio-political revolution purposes.
Finally it should be noted that some scholars re-
vealed scepticism concerning the role of Twitter within
socio-political revolutions. For instance, the Iran spe-
cific findings of Wojcieszak and Smith [28] support
voices that are skeptical about Twitter’s ability to
sustain revolution [101].
6. Framework guiding future research
As shown in figure 3, the framework guiding fu-
ture Twitter research spans both, (a) the coordination,
sentiment and rumor analysis problems as the primary
technological-/design-oriented challenges and (b) five
propositions from P1 to P5 to direct future empirical
research:
As the coordination problem refers to the manage-
ment of “dependencies between activities” [83, p. 90],
this concept comprises the recruiting [102] and the
leadership of the whole crowd [103] by signaling,
skills, rating, hierarchies, and markets [104,105] on
the basis of technical coordination mechanisms such as
automated negotiation and auction systems [106,107].
 I. Discontent of ongoing preference
the mass falsification of the mass
II. Inner tension of shift of the density of
the individual private preferences
P1 the straw that breaks
III. Trigger event
P2 the camel‘s back
Coordi-
IV. (Unanticipated) increase of magnitude nation
Revolution and revolutionary speed prob-
P lem
V. Revolutionary 3 guiding, suggesting, and
P4
Leadership P5 threatening activities
VI. Post-revolution repression of would-be Rumor
phase turncoats detection
Figure 3: A framework guiding future Twitter
research from a socio-political revolution perspective.
7. Conclusion, Limitations, Future Work
Following the research call of [1] we reviewed all
the existing “substantial” scientific work concerning
the online social network Twitter included in top peer-
reviewed journals and conferences related to the socio-
political revolution perspective and built up a compre-
hensive literature review. The review was structured
following Kuran’s theory [2] of (unanticipated) polit-
ical revolution and serves to stimulate future research
by proposing five propositions and three technological
design needs.
Because the analysis was restricted to peer-reviewed
publications with completed research work, a few
publications containing interesting material were po-
tentially excluded from this review. This excluded
material could contain negative or non-confirmatory
(test) results, potentially resulting in publication bias.
Besides, within our work we combined different types
of social unrest, movements and revolutions (see fig-
ure 2) in order to generalize the pattern of socio-
political revolution as far as possible. However, future
work could differentiate these different types.
Furthermore, future work should systematically
evaluate the five propositions P1 to P5 and the design
needs D1 to D3 . In addition, future work using alter-
native frameworks (e.g. by Tilly & Tarrow [108] or
Bennett & Segerberg [109]) for analyzing the body of
Twitter literature may be very useful.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the reviewers, who provided
very helpful comments on the refinement of the paper.
Senti- This research is partly funded by the German Federal
ment Ministry of Education and Research (03FH055PX2).
detecti-
on References
[1] O. Oh, C. Eom, and H. R. Rao, “Role of Social
Media in Social Change: An Analysis of Collective
Sense Making During the 2011 Egypt Revolution,”
Information Systems Research, vol. 26, no. 1, pp.
210–223, 2015.
[2] T. Kuran, “A Theory of Unanticipated Political Revolu-
tion,” Public Choice, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 41–74, 1989.
[3] J. A. Goldstone, “Toward a Fourth Generation of Revo-
lutionary Theory,” Annual Review of Political Science,
vol. 4, pp. 139–187, 2001.
[4] A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M.
Welpe, “Election Forecasts With Twitter: How 140
Characters Reflect the Political Landscape,” Soc Sci
Comput Rev, vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 402–418, 2011.
[5] A. Jungherr, P. Jürgens, and H. Schoen, “Why the
Pirate Party Won the German Election of 2009 or The
Trouble With Predictions: A Response to Tumasjan,
A., Sprenger, T. O., Sander, P. G., & Welpe, I.
M. ”Predicting Elections With Twitter: What 140
Characters Reveal About Political Sentiment”,” Soc
Sci Comput Rev, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 229–234, 2012.
[6] A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M.
Welpe, “Where There is a Sea There are Pirates:
Response to Jungherr, Jürgens, and Schoen,” Soc Sci
Comput Rev, vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 235–239, 2012.
[7] J. Webster and R. T. Watson, “Analyzing the past to
prepare for the future: Writing a literature review,”
MIS Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. xiii–xxiii, 2002.
[8] A. Bruns and J. Burgess, “Researching news discussion
on Twitter: New methodologies,” Journalism Studies,
vol. 13, no. 4-5, pp. 801–814, 2012.
[9] M. Efron, “Information Search and Retrieval in
Microblogs,” Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, vol. 62, no. 6,
pp. 996–1008, 2011.
[10] P. Tiernan, “A study of the use of Twitter by students
for lecture engagement and discussion,” Education and
Information Technologies, 2013, in press.
[11] C. Wankel, “Management education using social
media,” Organization Management Journal, vol. 6,
no. 4, pp. 251–262, 2009.
[12] M. Ebner, C. Lienhardt, M. Rohs, and I. Meyer,
“Microblogs in higher education – a chance to
facilitate informal and process-oriented learning?”
Computers & Education, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 92–100,
2010.
[13] N. Arceneaux and A. S. Weiss, “Seems stupid until you
try it: Press coverage of Twitter, 2006-9,” New Media &
Society, vol. 12, no. 8, pp. 1262–1279, 2010.
[14] D. Richter and M. Schäfermeyer, “Social Media Mar-
keting on multiple services the case of the student
run organisation AIESEC,” in ECIS 2011 Proceedings,
2011, paper 260.
[15] M. Kamel Boulos, B. Resch, D. Crowley, J. Breslin,
G. Sohn, R. Burtner, W. Pike, E. Jezierski, and K.-Y.
Chuang, “Crowdsourcing, citizen sensing and sensor
web technologies for public and environmental health
2212
 surveillance and crisis management: trends, OGC
standards and application examples,” International
Journal of Health Geographics, vol. 10, no. 1, pp.
1–29, 2011.
[16] M. Dredze, “How Social Media Will Change Public
Health,” IEEE Intelligent Systems, vol. 27, no. 4, pp.
81–84, 2012.
[17] R. Micieli and J. A. Micieli, “Twitter as a tool for oph-
thalmologists,” Canadian Journal of Ophthalmology,
vol. 47, no. 5, pp. 410–413, 2012.
[18] T. Smith and R. Lambert, “A systematic review
investigating the use of Twitter and Facebook
in university-based healthcare education,” Health
Education, vol. 114, no. 5, pp. 347–366, 2014.
[19] S. A. Williams, M. M. Terras, and C. Warwick,
“What do people study when they study Twitter?
Classifying Twitter related academic papers,” Journal
of Documentation, vol. 69, no. 3, pp. 384–410, 2013.
[20] M. Zimmer and N. J. Proferes, “A topology of Twitter
research: disciplines, methods, and ethics,” Aslib Jour-
nal of Information Management, vol. 66, no. 3, pp.
250–261, 2014.
[21] S. Lindgren and R. Lundström, “Pirate culture and
hacktivist mobilization: The cultural and social
protocols of #WikiLeaks on Twitter,” New Media &
Society, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 999–1018, 2011.
[22] V. V. Lysenko and K. C. Desouza, “Moldova’s internet
revolution: Analyzing the role of technologies in vari-
ous phases of the confrontation,” Technological Fore-
casting and Social Change, vol. 79, no. 2, pp. 341–361,
2012.
[23] A. Maireder and C. Schwarzenegger, “A movement of
connected individuals: Social media in the Austrian
student protests 2009,” Information Communication
and Society, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 171–195, 2012.
[24] K. H. Kwon, O. Oh, M. Agrawal, and H. R. Rao,
“Audience Gatekeeping in the Twitter Service: An
Investigation of Tweets about the 2009 Gaza Conflict,”
AIS Transactions on Human-Computer Interaction,
vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 212–229, 2012.
[25] O. Oh, K. Kwon, M. Agrawal, and H. Rao, “Choice of
Information: A Study of Twitter News Sharing during
the 2009 Israel-Gaza Conflict,” in ICIS 2011 Proceed-
ings, 2011, paper 1.
[26] H. Thorpe and N. Ahmad, “Youth, action sports and
political agency in the Middle East: Lessons from
a grassroots parkour group in Gaza,” International
Review for the Sociology of Sport, 2013, in press.
[27] T. Zeitzoff, “Using social media to measure conflict
dynamics: An application to the 2008-2009 Gaza
Conflict,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 55,
no. 6, pp. 938–969, 2011.
[28] M. Wojcieszak and B. Smith, “Will politics be tweeted?
New media use by Iranian youth in 2011,” New Media
& Society, 2013, in press.
[29] A. J. Morales, J. C. Losada, and R. M. Benito, “Users
structure and behavior on an online social network dur-
ing a political protest,” Physica A: Statistical Mechan-
ics and its Applications, vol. 391, no. 21, pp. 5244–
5253, 2012.
[30] A. Jungherr and P. Jrgens, “Through a Glass, Darkly:
Tactical Support and Symbolic Association in Twitter
Messages Commenting on Stuttgart 21,” Soc Sci
2213
Comput Rev, 2013, in press.
[31] J. Earl, H. M. Hurwitz, A. M. Mesinas, M. Tolan,
and A. Arlotti, “This protest will be tweeted: Twitter
and protest policing during the Pittsburgh G20,”
Information, Communication & Society, vol. 16, no. 4,
pp. 459–478, 2013.
[32] T. Poell and E. Borra, “Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr
as platforms of alternative journalism: The social
media account of the 2010 Toronto G20 protests,”
Journalism, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 695–713, 2012.
[33] T. Poell, “Social media and the transformation
of activist communication: exploring the social
media ecology of the 2010 Toronto G20 protests,”
Information, Communication & Society, vol. 17, no. 6,
pp. 716–731, 2014.
[34] S. Aday, H. Farrell, D. Freelon, M. Lynch, J. Sides, and
M. Dewar, “Watching From Afar: Media Consumption
Patterns Around the Arab Spring,” American Behav-
ioral Scientist, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 899–919, 2013.
[35] A. Bruns, T. Highfield, and J. Burgess, “The Arab
Spring and Social Media Audiences: English and
Arabic Twitter Users and Their Networks,” American
Behavioral Scientist, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 871–898,
2013.
[36] A. Choudhary, W. Hendrix, K. Lee, D. Palsetia, and
W.-K. Liao, “Social Media Evolution of the Egyptian
Revolution,” CACM, vol. 55, no. 5, pp. 74–80, 2012.
[37] B. Doerr, M. Fouz, and T. Friedrich, “Why Rumors
Spread So Quickly in Social Networks,” CACM,
vol. 55, no. 6, pp. 70–75, 2012.
[38] S. González-Bailón, J. Borge-Holthoefer, and
Y. Moreno, “Broadcasters and Hidden Influentials
in Online Protest Diffusion,” American Behavioral
Scientist, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 943–965, 2013.
[39] A. A. Jamal, R. O. Keohane, D. Romney,
and D. Tingley, “Anti-Americanism and Anti-
Interventionism in Arabic Twitter Discourses,”
Perspectives on Politics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 55–73,
2015.
[40] S. Meraz and Z. Papacharissi, “Networked Gatekeeping
and Networked Framing on #Egypt,” International
Journal of Press/Politics, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 138–166,
2013.
[41] Z. Papacharissi and M. de Fatima Oliveira, “Affective
News and Networked Publics: The Rhythms of News
Storytelling on #Egypt,” Journal of Communication,
vol. 62, no. 2, pp. 266–282, 2012.
[42] M. Severo and E. Zuolo, “Egyptian e-diaspora: Migrant
websites without a network?” Social Science Informa-
tion, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 521–533, 2012.
[43] P. Panagiotopoulos, A. Z. Bigdeli, and S. Sams,
“Citizen–government collaboration on social media:
The case of Twitter in the 2011 riots in England,” Gov
Inf Q, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 349–357, 2014.
[44] R. Procter, F. Vis, and A. Voss, “Reading the riots on
Twitter: methodological innovation for the analysis of
big data,” International Journal of Social Research
Methodology, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 197–214, 2013.
[45] E. Tonkin, H. D. Pfeiffer, and G. Tourte, “Twitter, infor-
mation sharing and the London riots?” Bulletin of the
American Society for Information Science and Tech-
nology, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 49–57, 2012.
[46] M. T. Bastos, D. Mercea, and A. Charpentier, “Tents,
 Tweets, and Events: The Interplay Between Ongoing
Protests and Social Media,” Journal of Communication,
vol. 65, no. 2, pp. 320–350, 2015.
[47] W. L. Bennett, A. Segerberg, and S. Walker, “Organi-
zation in the crowd: peer production in large-scale net-
worked protests,” Information, Communication & So-
ciety, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 232–260, 2014.
[48] B. Gleason, “#Occupy Wall Street: Exploring Informal
Learning About a Social Movement on Twitter,” Amer-
ican Behavioral Scientist, vol. 57, no. 7, pp. 966–982,
2013.
[49] S. J. Park, Y. S. Lim, and H. W. Park, “Comparing
Twitter and YouTube networks in information
diffusion: The case of the ’Occupy Wall Street’
movement,” Technological Forecasting & Social
Change, vol. 95, pp. 208–217, 2015.
[50] J. Penney and C. Dadas, “(Re)Tweeting in the service
of protest: Digital composition and circulation in
the Occupy Wall Street movement,” New Media &
Society, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 74–90, 2014.
[51] Y. Theocharis, W. Lowe, van Deth Jan W., and
G. Garcı́a-Albacete, “Using Twitter to mobilize
protest action: online mobilization patterns and action
repertoires in the Occupy Wall Street, Indignados,
and Aganaktismenoi movements,” Information,
Communication & Society, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 202–
220, 2015.
[52] M. Tremayne, “Anatomy of Protest in the Digital
Era: A Network Analysis of Twitter and Occupy Wall
Street,” Social Movement Studies, vol. 13, no. 1, pp.
110–126, 2014.
[53] W. Wang, Z. Li, Y. Wang, and F. Chen, “Indexing cog-
nitive workload based on pupillary response under lu-
minance and emotional changes,” in Proceedings of the
2013 International Conference on Intelligent User In-
terfaces, ser. IUI ’13, 2013, pp. 247–256.
[54] I. Peña-López, M. Congosto, and P. Aragón, “Spanish
Indignados and the evolution of the 15M movement on
Twitter: towards networked para-institutions,” Journal
of Spanish Cultural Studies, vol. 15, no. 1-2, pp.
189–216, 2014.
[55] S. Vicari, “Public reasoning around social contention:
A case study of Twitter use in the Italian mobilization
for global change,” Current Sociology, vol. 61, pp.
474–490, 2013, 4.
[56] V. A. S., N. Iyer, M. D. Hossain, and J. Park, “Time,
place, technology: Twitter as an information source in
the Wisconsin labor protests,” Computers in Human
Behavior, vol. 31, pp. 65–72, 2014.
[57] L. J. Heemsbergen and S. Lindgren, “The power of
precision air strikes and social media feeds in the
2012 Israel–Hamas conflict: targeting transparency,”
Australian Journal of International Affairs, vol. 68,
no. 5, pp. 569–591, 2014.
[58] K. Varnali and V. Gorgulu, “A social influence perspec-
tive on expressive political participation in twitter: the
case of #occupygezi,” Information, Communication &
Society, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–16, 2015.
[59] C. A. Bliss, I. M. Kloumann, K. D. Harris, C. M.
Danforth, and P. S. Dodds, “Twitter reciprocal
reply networks exhibit assortativity with respect
to happiness,” Journal of Computational Science,
vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 388–397, 2012.
2214
[60] T. Lansdall-Welfare, V. Lampos, and N. Cristianini,
“Nowcasting the mood of the nation,” Significance,
vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 26–28, 2012.
[61] A. Trilla and F. Alı́as, “Sentence-based Sentiment
Analysis for Expressive Text-to-Speech,” IEEE
Transactions on Audio, Speech, and Language
Processing, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 223–233, 2013.
[62] J. Bollen, B. Gonçalves, G. Ruan, and H. Mao, “Hap-
piness Is Assortative in Online Social Networks,” Arti-
ficial Life, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 237–251, 2011.
[63] S. Passini, “The facebook and Twitter revolutions: Ac-
tive participation in the 21st century,” Human Affairs,
vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 301–312, 2012.
[64] D. L. Collinson, “’Engineering humour’: masculinity,
joking and conflict in shop-floor relations,”
Organization Studies, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 181–199,
1988.
[65] G. A. Fine and M. de Soucey, “Joking cultures: Humor
themes as social regulation in group life,” Humor - In-
ternational Journal of Humor Research, vol. 18, no. 1,
pp. 1–22, 2005.
[66] P. Burnap, O. F. Rana, N. Avis, M. Williams,
W. Housley, A. Edwards, J. Morgan, and L. Sloan,
“Detecting tension in online communities with
computational Twitter analysis,” Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 95, pp. 96–
108, 2015.
[67] R. Sandoval-Almazan and J. R. Gil-Garcia, “Towards
cyberactivism 2.0? Understanding the use of social
media and other information technologies for political
activism and social movements,” Gov Inf Q, vol. 31,
no. 3, pp. 365–378, 2014.
[68] J. Wilson, “Playing with politics: Political fans and
Twitter faking in post-broadcast democracy,” New
Media & Society, vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 445–461, 2011.
[69] C.-J. Wang, P.-P. Wang, and J. J. Zhu, “Discussing
Occupy Wall Street on Twitter: Longitudinal Network
Analysis of Equality, Emotion, and Stability of Public
Discussion,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, vol. 16, no. 9, pp. 679–685, 2013.
[70] B. G. Glaser and A. L. Strauss, Grounded Theory:
Strategien Qualitativer Forschung. Bern, Switzerland:
Huber, 2008.
[71] H. M. Abdelsalam, C. G. Reddick, S. Gamal, and
A. Al-shaar, “Social media in Egyptian government
websites: Presence, usage, and effectiveness,” Gov Inf
Q, vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 406–416, 2013.
[72] A. Coppock, A. Guess, and J. Ternovski, “When Treat-
ments are Tweets: A Network Mobilization Experiment
over Twitter,” Polit Behav, 2015, in press.
[73] K. Barzilai-Nahon, Network Gatekeeping Theory.
Medford, NJ: Information Today, 2005, pp. 247–254.
[74] K. Barzilai-Nahon, “Gatekeepers, Virtual Communi-
ties and the Gated: Multidimensional Tensions in Cy-
berspace,” International Journal of Communications
Law & Policy, vol. 11, 2006.
[75] K. Barzilai-Nahon, “Toward a theory of network
gatekeeping: A framework for exploring information
control,” Journal of the American Society for
Information Science and Technology, vol. 59, no. 9,
pp. 1493–1512, 2008.
[76] M. Kardara, G. Papadakis, A. Papaoikonomou,
K. Tserpes, and T. Varvarigou, “Large-scale evaluation
 framework for local influence theories in Twitter,”
Information Processing & Management, vol. 51, no. 1,
pp. 226–252, 2015.
[77] S. Rbiger and M. Spiliopoulou, “A framework for vali-
dating the merit of properties that predict the influence
of a twitter user,” Expert Systems with Applications,
vol. 42, no. 5, pp. 2824–2834, 2015.
[78] C. S. Park, “Does Twitter motivate involvement in
politics? Tweeting, opinion leadership, and political
engagement,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 29,
no. 4, pp. 1641–1648, 2013.
[79] F. J. Yammarino, Indirect leadership: Transformational
leadership at a distance. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994,
pp. 26–47.
[80] K. Ingerson and J. Bruce, “Leadership in the
Twitterverse,” Journal of Leadership Studies, vol. 7,
no. 3, pp. 74–83, 2013.
[81] D. A. Gruber, R. E. Smerek, M. C. Thomas-Hunt, and
E. H. James, “The real-time power of Twitter: Crisis
management and leadership in an age of social media,”
Business Horizons, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 163–172, 2015.
[82] T. W. Malone, “Modeling Coordination in Organi-
zations and Markets,” Management Science, vol. 33,
no. 10, pp. 1317–1332, 1987.
[83] T. W. Malone and K. Crowston, “The Interdisciplinary
Study of Coordination,” ACM Computing Surveys,
vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 87–119, 1994.
[84] H. Purohit, A. Hampton, S. Bhatt, V. L. Shalin, A. P.
Sheth, and J. M. Flach, “Identifying Seekers and
Suppliers in Social Media Communities to Support
Crisis Coordination,” Computer Supported Cooperative
Work, vol. 23, no. 4-6, pp. 513–545, 2014.
[85] L. Tang, Z. Ni, H. Xiong, and H. Zhu, “Locating targets
through mention in Twitter,” World Wide Web, 2014, in
press.
[86] H. Mintzberg, The Structuring of Organizations: A
Synthesis of the Research. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: PH,
1979.
[87] R. M. Tripathy, A. Bagchi, and S. Mehta, “Towards
combating rumors in social networks: Models and
metrics,” Intelligent Data Analysis, vol. 17, no. 1, pp.
149–175, 2013.
[88] M. Miyabe, A. Nadamoto, and E. Aramaki, “How
do rumors spread during a crisis?: Analysis of rumor
expansion and disaffirmation on Twitter after 3.11
in Japan,” International Journal of Web Information
Systems, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 394–412, 2014.
[89] H. Kwon, M. Choi, H. Kim, and K. Lee, “Dynamic
Characteristics of Tweeting and Tweet Topics,” Journal
of the Korean Physical Society, vol. 60, no. 4, pp.
590–594, 2012.
[90] D. Barbieri, D. Braga, S. Ceri, E. Della Valle,
Y. Huang, V. Tresp, A. Rettinger, and H. Wermser,
“Deductive and Inductive Stream Reasoning for
Semantic Social Media Analytics,” IEEE Intelligent
Systems, vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 32–41, 2010.
[91] C. Budak, D. Agrawal, and A. El Abbadi, “Structural
Trend Analysis for Online Social Networks,” Journal
of VLDB Endowment, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 646–656,
2011.
[92] C. Wang and B. Huberman, “Long trend dynamics in
social media,” EPJ Data Science, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 2,
2012.
2215
[93] L. Carter, J. B. Thatcher, and R. Wright, “Social Media
and Emergency Management: Exploring State and Lo-
cal Tweets,” in HICSS-47 Proc., 2014, pp. 1968–1977.
[94] A. T. Chatfield, H. J. Scholl, and U. Brajawidagda,
“#Sandy Tweets: Citizens Co-Production of Time-
Critical Information during an Unfolding Catastrophe,”
in HICSS-47 Proc., 2014, pp. 1947–1957.
[95] M. Naaman, H. Becker, and L. Gravano, “Hip and
Trendy: Characterizing Emerging Trends on Twitter,”
Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 902–918,
2011.
[96] J. Hemsley and J. Eckert, “Examining the Role of
’Place’ in Twitter Networks through the Lens of
Contentious Politics,” in HICSS-47 Proc., 2014, pp.
1844–1853.
[97] R. Lee, S. Wakamiya, and K. Sumiya, “Discovery
of unusual regional social activities using geo-tagged
microblogs,” World Wide Web, vol. 14, pp. 321–349,
2011.
[98] C.-H. Lee, “Mining spatio-temporal information on mi-
croblogging streams using a density-based online clus-
tering method,” Expert Systems with Applications,
vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 9623–9641, 2012.
[99] C.-H. Lee, “Unsupervised and supervised learning to
evaluate event relatedness based on content mining
from social-media streams,” Expert Systems with
Applications, vol. 39, no. 18, pp. 13 338–13 356, 2012.
[100] A. Crooks, A. Croitoru, A. Stefanidis, and
J. Radzikowski, “#Earthquake: Twitter as a Distributed
Sensor System,” Transactions in GIS, vol. 17, no. 1,
pp. 124–147, 2013.
[101] A. A. Olorunnisola and B. L. Martin, “Influences of
media on social movements: Problematizing hyperbolic
inferences about impacts,” Telematics and Informatics,
vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 275–288, 2013.
[102] R. Buettner, “A Framework for Recommender Systems
in Online Social Network Recruiting,” in HICSS-47
Proc., 2014, pp. 1415–1424.
[103] R. Buettner, “A Systematic Literature Review of
Crowdsourcing Research from a Human Resource
Management Perspective,” in HICSS-48 Proc., 2015,
pp. 4609–4618.
[104] G. A. Akerlof, “The Market for ’Lemons’: Quality
Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism,” Quarterly
Journal of Economics, vol. 84, no. 3, pp. 488–500,
1970.
[105] A. M. Spence, “Job Market Signaling,” Quarterly
Journal of Economics, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 355–374,
1973.
[106] R. Buettner, “The State of the Art in Automated
Negotiation Models of the Behavior and Information
Perspective,” ITSSA, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 351–356, 2006.
[107] R. Buettner, “A Classification Structure for Automated
Negotiations,” in IEEE/WIC/ACM WI-IAT 2006 Proc.,
2006, pp. 523–530.
[108] C. Tilly and S. Tarrow, Contentious Politics. Paradigm
Publishers, 2007.
[109] W. L. Bennett and A. Segerberg, “The logic
of connective action: Digital media and the
personalization of contentious politics,” Information,
Communication & Society, vol. 15, no. 5, pp. 739–768,
2012.