ой

1. The Internet as a Factor of Participation in Protests:
Cross Country Analysis
Kirkizh Eleonora
Higher School of Economics (SPb)

2. Structure
• Theory
• Hypothesis
• Data and Method
• Results
• Conclusions
• Further research

3. Theory
Theory of Information Society
The direct link between politics, media and the crisis of political legitimacy in a global perspective.
The development of interactive, horizontal networks of communication has induced the rise of a new
form of communication, mass self-communication, over the Internet and wireless communication
networks. (Castells, 2007)
Discussion
Protesters in Northern African and Middle East countries have been using social networks for
coordination and information exchange. (Breuer, 2012)
Using Facebook or Twitter, citizens created groups where they posted news, calls, announcements
and other items concerning protests. (Gaffney, 2009)
Protests in Chile, Iran, Belgium, Spain and the Arab countries.
(Lotan, 2011, González-Bailón, 2013)

4. Hypothesis
H1: Probability of protest participation of citizens is more if they use the Internet as
a information resource. (Howard, 2010)
H2: Probability of protest participation is higher if a citizen (unemployed, middle
income, has political interest, well educated) uses the Internet as a information
resource. (Gaffney, 2009, Wolfsfeld, 2012, Korotaev, 2013)

5. Data and Method
World Value Survey, wave 6 (2011-2013)
Countries: 42
Individuals: over 42,000
Variables:
• Dependent: protest participation
• Independent: employment status, age, confidence: the government,
income, information recourse: Internet, friends, post materialist index
(4-item), age, education, religiosity, political view.
• Group level variable: country
Method: GLMM

6. Coefficient St. Error
internet (yes) 0.421*** (0.036)
friends (yes) 0.314*** (0.044)
education
high
–0.273***
(0.046)
low
–0.620***
(0.048)
politics (yes) 0.739*** (0.032)
post materialist
mixed
0.275***
(0.036)
post
0.694***
(0.050)
religious (yes) –0.187*** (0.040)
age
mid
–0.301***
(0.036)
young
–0.440***
(0.048)
employment (yes) –0.104* (0.057)
views
mixed
–0.564***
(0.036)
right
–0.561***
(0.038)
Observations 44,146
Pseudo R-squared 0.140
Regression results
Model 1
Note:
*p<0.1;
**p<0.05;
***p<0.01

7. Model 1 Model 1* Internet
friends (yes) 0.314***
(0.044)
–0.076
(0.088)
education (high) –0.273***
(0.046)
–0.205*
(0.094)
politics (yes) 0.739***
(0.032)
0.114
(0.061)
post materialist (mixed) 0.275***
(0.036)
0.224
(0.087)
religious (yes) –0.187***
(0.040)
0.056
(0.075)
age (mid) –0.301***
(0.036)
0.054
(0.058)
employment (yes) –0.104*
(0.057)
–0.317**
(0.111)
views (mixed) –0.564***
(0.036)
–0.571***
(0.036)
Observations 44,146
Pseudo R-squared 0.140
Regression results
Model 1
Model 1* with interactive effects
Note:
*p<0.1;
**p<0.05;
***p<0.01

10. Conclusions
Individual level
• The average regression coefficient for the Internet use across 42 countries equals 0.42. The
probability of whether a citizen, reading news on the Internet, joins a protest is 52% higher than if
he/she does not.
• Different interactive effects. Mostly the Internet is not a significant factor.
Group level
• The effect of the Internet is positive in most countries. Only in three states – Japan, Kazakhstan
and Peru – the effect is negative.
• In other countries usage of the Internet turns to be a significant positive predictor. However,
coefficients of the effects among them vary vastly: from 0.1 to 0.8.
• Four groups of the countries with the lowest effect of the Internet to the highest effect. The highest
coefficients (0.7–0.8) were observed in the following countries: Chile, Colombia, Ghana,
Tunisia, Libya, Yemen, and Pakistan.

11. Further research
• Analysis with group level variables (the Internet penetration, GDP,
Human Rights Risk Index, Corruption Rate etc.)