Model of Social Media Use in Urban Voter Electoral Campaigns in DKI Jakarta

research
  • 13 Oct
  • 2026

Model of Social Media Use in Urban Voter Electoral Campaigns in DKI Jakarta

ABSTRACT

Background:Social media has become a key platform for political campaigns among urban voters. However, digital engagement does not always translate into electoral mobilization and voting decisions.Objective:This study aims to develop and test an effective social media use model in explaining the conversion of digital mobilization into voting decisions for urban voters in DKI Jakarta in the 2024 Legislative Election.Methods:The research uses a sequential explanatory mixed methods design that integrates qualitative and quantitative approaches. The qualitative phase was carried out through in-depth interviews with 12 informants consisting of elected candidates, successful teams, and young voters, as well as content analysis of 240 Instagram posts. Qualitative findings were used to build a conceptual model which was then tested through a survey of 768 urban young voters using the Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) method.Results:Four digital communication strategies were identified. Direct Interaction had the strongest effect on Voting Decisions and Electoral Mobilization, followed by Service & Incentives, while Explicit Support was insignificant and Digital Literacy showed no moderating effect. Differences were also found between opposition and pro-government candidates.Conclusion:These findings enrich the Elaboration Likelihood Model (ELM) by affirming the dominance of the central line through two-way interaction in social media-based political campaigns, while providing practical implications for the development of more effectivedigital campaign strategies in increasing urban voter engagement and mobilization.

Unduhan

 

REFERENSI

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-TAPJII. (2024).Laporan survei penetrasi internet Indonesia 2024. Asosiasi Penyelenggara Jasa Internet Indonesia.Armstrong, J. S., & Overton, T. S. (1977). Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys. Journal of Marketing Research, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/002224377701400320Boulianne, S. (2020). Twenty Years of Digital Media Effects on Civic and Political Participation. Communication Research, 47(7). https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218808186Boulianne, S., & Theocharis, Y. (2020). Young People, Digital Media, and Engagement: A Meta-Analysis of Research. Social Science Computer Review, 38(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318814190Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2008). Using thematic analysis in psychology,Qualitative Research in Psychology. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 3(2).Chen, C., Cohen, O., & Sundar, S. S. (2022). Differentiating Problematic from Habitual Instagram Use: A Uses and Grats 2.0 Perspective. Social Media and Society, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221116339Chin, W. W., Marcelin, B. L., & Newsted, P. R. (2003). A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: Results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Information Systems Research, 14(2). https://doi.org/10.1287/isre.14.2.189.16018Cohen, J. (2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. routledge.Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage publications.Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as arena for the authentic outsider: exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. European Journal of Communication, 32(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116682802Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward Clarification of a Fractured Paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1993.tb01304.xFetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs -Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6 PART2). https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/002224378101800104Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1). https://doi.org/10.1093/biomet/61.1.101Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2012). Social Media Use for News and Individuals’ Social Capital, Civic Engagement and Political Participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2012.01574.xGuess, A. M., Lerner, M., Lyons, B., Montgomery, J. M., Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., & Sircar, N. (2020). A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(27). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920498117Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2020). Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0833-xHair Jr, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2021). A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage publications.Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8Hunter, W. (2019). Votes for Survival: Relational Clientelism in Latin America. By Simeon Nichter. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018. 324p. $105.00 cloth, $34.99 paper. Perspectives on Politics, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592719002135Jones-Jang, S. M., Mortensen, T., & Liu, J. (2021). Does Media Literacy Help Identification of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t. American Behavioral Scientist, 65(2), 371–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869406Kruikemeier, S. (2014). How political candidates use Twitter and the impact on votes. Computers in Human Behavior, 34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.025KPU DKI Jakarta. (2024).Data daftar pemilih tetap Pemilu 2024 Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Komisi Pemilihan Umum Provinsi DKI Jakarta.Liu, Q., Su, F., Mu, A., & Wu, X. (2024). Understanding Social Media Information Sharing in Individuals with Depression: Insights from the Elaboration Likelihood Model and Schema Activation Theory. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 17. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S450934Ludwig, J., & Sommer, J. (2024). Mindsets and politically motivated reasoning about fake news. Motivation and Emotion, 48(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-024-10067-0Norris, P. (2004). Electoral engineering: Voting rules and political behavior. In Electoral Engineering: Voting Rules and Political Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790980Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879Rekker, R., & Harteveld, E. (2024). Understanding factual belief polarization: the role of trust, political sophistication, and affective polarization. Acta Politica, 59(3). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41269-022-00265-4Ringle, C. M., Wende, S., & Becker, J.-M. (2022). SmartPLS 4. Oststeinbek: SmartPLS GmbH. J. Appl. Struct. Equ. Model., 1(August).Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013). Emotions and information diffusion in social media -Sentiment of microblogs and sharing behavior. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290408Stone, M. (1974). Cross-Validatory Choice and Assessment of Statistical Predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B: Statistical Methodology, 36(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1974.tb00994.xStromer-Galley, J. (2014). Presidential Campaigning in the Internet Age. In Presidential Campaigning in the Internet Age. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199731930.001.0001Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. M. (2013). Uses and Grats 2.0: New Gratifications for New Media. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 57(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.845827Vaccari, C. and A. V. (2021). Outside the bubble: Social media and political participation in Western democracies. Oxford University Press.

Cari

Bidang Ilmu

Kategori

Kiriman Terbaru