Методология исследования коммуникативных стратегий политических лидеров в онлайн-пространстве

Представлен анализ эволюции концепции политического лидерства. Рассмотрены особенности самопрезентации политических лидеров в связи с развитием цифровых коммуникационных технологий. Разработаны и обоснованы методологические принципы анализа стратегий политических лидеров в онлайн-пространстве. Определены и содержательно раскрыты основные методы исследования, в том числе особенности работы с большими массивами данных (Big data) при анализе цифровой коммуникации политических лидеров. Отдельно рассмотрены современные методы математического моделирования, позволяющие решать проблемы разработки и реализации эффективных стратегий политических лидеров в онлайн-пространстве (вероятностные модели, детерминированные и стохастические модели, модели на основе теории игр и др.).

политический лидер, самопрезентация, стратегия, коммуникация, онлайн-пространство, интернет, модели, цифровизация

1. Van Seters D. A., Field R. H. The evolution of leadership theory // Journal of organizational change management. 1990. Vol. 3 (3). P. 29−45.

2. Day D. V., Antonakis J. Leadership: Past, present, and future. The nature of leadership, 2012. P. 3−25.

3. Winkler I. Contemporary leadership theories: Enhancing the understanding of the complexity, subjectivity and dynamic of leadership. Springer Science & Business Media. 2010.

4. Uhl-Bien M., Marion R., McKelvey B. Complexity leadership theory: Shifting leadership from the industrial age to the knowledge era // The leadership quarterly. 2007. Vol. 18 (4). P. 298−318.

5. Wilson III E. J., Goethals G. R., Sorenson G., Burns J. M. Leadership in the digital age // Encyclopedia of leadership. 2004. 1, 4.

6. Medialogy. TOP 15 most cited Russian bloggers − January 2019. URL: https://www.mlg.ru/ratings/socmedia/blogers/6516/ (дата обращения: 23.09.2019).

7. Golbeck J., Grimes J. M., Rogers A. Twitter use by the US Congress // Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 2010. Vol. 61(8). P. 1612−1621.

8. O’Connell D. #Selfie: Instagram and the United States Congress. Social Media+ Society, 2018. 4(4), 2056305118813373.

9. Jarvis S. E., Wilkerson K. Congress on the Internet: Messages on the Homepages of the US House of Representatives, 1996 and 2001 // Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2005. Vol. 10(2), JCMC1024.

10. Bossetta M. The digital architectures of social media: Comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 US election // Journalism & mass communication quarterly. 2018. Vol. 95(2). P. 471−496.

11. Gerbaudo P. Social media teams as digital vanguards: the question of leadership in the management of key Facebook and Twitter accounts of Occupy Wall Street, Indignados and UK Uncut // Information, Communication & Society. 2017. Vol. 20(2). P. 185−202.

12. Liden G. Inequality in Local Digital Politics: How Different Preconditions for Citizen Engagement Can Be Explained // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (3). P. 270–291.

13. De Blasio E., Selva D. Why Choose Open Government? Motivations for the Adoption of Open Government Policies in Four European Countries // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (3). P. 225–247.

14. Dumoulin L., Licoppe C. Videoconferencing, New Public Management, and Organizational Reform in the Judiciary // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (3). P. 313–333.

15. Severo M., Feredj A., Romele A. Soft Data and Public Policy: Can Social Media Offer Alternatives to Official Statistics in Urban Policymaking? // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (3). P. 354–372.

16. VCIOM. Internet versus television: the battle continues. Press release. No. 3367, 03.05.2017. URL: http://wciom.ru/index.php?id=236&uid=116190 (дата обращения: 26.09.2019).

17. FOM. Trust of Russian media. 30.04.2015. URL: https://fom.ru/posts/12140/ (дата обращения: 26.09.2019).

18. Dubois E., Gaffney D. “The Freeman, C. 1978/1979. “Centrality in Social Networks/ Conceptual Clarification” // Social Networks. 2014. Vol. 1. P. 215–239.

19. Gonzalez-Bailon S., Wang. N. Networked Discontent: The Anatomy of Protest Campaigns in Social Media // Social Networks. 2016. Vol. 44. P. 95–104.

20. Bingham L. B., Nabatchi T., O’Leary R. The New Governance: Practices and Processes for Stakeholder and Citizen Participation in the Work of Government // Public Administration Review. 2005. Vol. 65 (5). P. 547–558.

21. Ceron A., Negri F. The ‘Social Side’ of Public Policy: Monitoring Online Public Opinion and Its Mobilization During the Policy Cycle // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (2). P. 131–147.

22. Smith G., Richards R. C., Gastil J. The Potential of Participedia as a Crowdsourcing Tool for Comparative Analysis of Democratic Innovations // Policy & Internet. 2015. Vol. 7 (2). P. 243–262.

23. Barros S. A. R., Sampaio R. C. Do Citizens Trust Electronic Participatory Budgeting? Public Expression in Online Forums as an Evaluation Method in Belo Horizonte // Policy & Internet. 2016. Vol. 8 (3). P. 292–312.

24. Vishwanath A., Barnett A. 2011. The Diffusion of Innovations: A Communication Science Perspective. NY: Peter Lang; Dubois E., and D. Gaffney. 2014. “The Freeman, C. 1978/1979. “Centrality in Social Networks/Conceptual Clarification.” Social Networks 1. P. 215–239.

25. Yoon H. Y., Park H. Strategies Affecting Twitter Based Networking Pattern of South Korean Politicians: Social Network Analysis and Exponential Random Graph Model // Quality and Quantity. 2014. Vol. 48 (1). P. 409–423.

26. Lassen D. S, Brown A. R. Twitter: The Electoral Connection? // Social Science Computer Review. 2011. Vol. 29 (4). P. 419–436.

27. Conover M. D., Ratkiewicz J., Francisco M., Goncalves J. M., Flammini F., Menczer F. Political Polarization on Twitter // Proceedings of the Fifth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media. Barcelona: AAAI, 2011. P. 89−96.

28. Enli G. S., Skogerbø E. Personalized campaigns in party-centred politics: Twitter and Facebook as arenas for political communication // Information, communication & society. 2013. Vol. 16(5). P. 757−774.

29. Lilleker D. G., Koc-Michalska K. Online political communication strategies: MEPs, erepresentation, and self-representation // Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 2013. Vol. 10(2). P. 190−207.

30. Chu Z., Gianvecchio S., Wang H., Jajodia S. Detecting automation of Twitter accounts: Are you a human, bot, or cyborg? // IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing. 2012. Vol. 9(6). P. 811–824. DOI:10.1109/TDSC.2012.75, 20.

31. Grimme C., Preuss M., Adam L., Trautmann H. Social Bots: Human-Like by Means of Human Control? // Big data. 2017. Vol. 5(4). P. 293−279.

32. Howard P. N., Woolley S., Calo R. Algorithms, bots, and political communication in the US 2016 election: The challenge of automated political communication for election law and administration // Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 2018. Vol. 15. No. 2. P. 81−93. Doi:10.1080/19331681.2018.1448735

33. Bolsover G, Howard P. Chinese computational propaganda: automation, algorithms and the manipulation of information about Chinese politics on Twitter and Weibo // Information, Communication & Society. 2018. P. 1−18. DOI:10.1080/1369118X.2018.1476576

34. Howard P. N., Kollanyi B. Bots, #Strongerin, and #Brexit: Computational propaganda during the UK-EU referendum. 2016; 1. Oxford, UK: Project on Computational Propaganda. [cited 2018 Sep 07]. DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2798311

35. Varol O., Ferrara E., Davis C. A., Menczer F., Flammini A. Online human-bot interactions: Detection, estimation, and characterization // Eleventh international AAAI conference on web and social media, 2017. P. 280−289.

36. Vasilkova V. V., Legostaeva N. I. Social bots in political communication // Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series: Sociology. 2019. Vol. 19(1). P. 121−133.

37. Kirman A. Ants, rationality, and recruitment // The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1993. Vol. 108(1). P. 137−156.

38. Alfarano S., Lux T., Wagner F. Estimation of agent-based models: the case of an asymmetric herding model // Computational Economics. 2005. Vol. 26(1). P. 19−49.

39. Leslie P. H., Gower J. C. The properties of a stochastic model for the predator-prey type of interaction between two species // Biometrika. 1960. Vol. 47(3/4). P. 219−234.

40. Mikhailov A. P., Petrov A. P. H., Pronicheva O. G., Panchev G. B., Moravcova N. A. Modeling periodic destabilizing influences in information confrontation in society. Preprints of the Institute of applied mathematics. M In Keldysh ran, (0). 2016. P. 16−13.

41. Barabanov I. N., Novikov D. A. A dynamic model of the excitation control of the crowd in discrete time // Automation and telemechanics. 2016 Vol. 10. P. 123−139.

42. Wang Y., Theodorou E., Verma A., Song L. A Stochastic Differential Equation Framework for Guiding Online User Activities in Closed Loop. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics. 2018, March. P. 1077−1086.

43. Suo S., Chen Y. The dynamics of public opinion in complex networks // Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation. 2008. Vol. 11(4). P. 2.

44. Fotakis D., Palyvos-Giannas D., Skoulakis S. Opinion Dynamics with Local Interactions. In IJCAI. 2016, July. P. 279−285.