Empirische Aufbruchsstimmung? Verdatung und Datafizierung als Impulsgeber kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Forschung?

Table of contents

Bibliographic information


Cover of Volume: M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft Volume 74 (2026), Issue 1
Open Access Full access

M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft

Volume 74 (2026), Issue 1


Authors:
Publisher
Nomos, Baden-Baden
Copyright Year
2026
ISSN-Online
2942-3317
ISSN-Print
1615-634X

Chapter information


Open Access Full access

Volume 74 (2026), Issue 1

Empirische Aufbruchsstimmung? Verdatung und Datafizierung als Impulsgeber kommunikationswissenschaftlicher Forschung?


Authors:
ISSN-Print
1615-634X
ISSN-Online
2942-3317


Preview:

This article examines the impact of datafication and the growing availability of data on research practices in communication studies in German-speaking countries. Against the backdrop of change processes such as mediatization and digitalization, it asks whether the increase in (process-produced) data has led not only to expanded research opportunities but also to renewed empirical momentum within the discipline. A content analysis of 935 original articles published in the journals Publizistik, M&K, and SCM (2003-2023) reveals a consistently high proportion of empirical studies (approx. 70 %), with quantitative methods clearly predominating. At the same time, a decline in secondary analyses and longitudinal research designs occurs—contrasting with developments in sociology, where such approaches have increased. Since 2013, computational methods have gained noticeable relevance, while experimental designs have declined. The article points to structural deficits in the provision and reuse of research data relevant to communication studies, despite isolated advances. The findings underscore the need to establish institutionalized data infrastructures in order to sustainably promote data-driven research and ensure alignment with international developments.

Bibliography


  1. Altay, S., Berriche, M., & Acerbi, A. (2023). Misinformation on Misinformation: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges. Social Media + Society, 9(1), 205630512211504. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221150412 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  2. boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical Questions for Big Data. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  3. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The Mediated Construction of Reality. Polity. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  4. Couldry, N., & Mejias, U. A. (2019). The Costs of Connection: How Data Is Colonizing Human Life and Appropriating It for Capitalism. Stanford University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  5. Dijck, J. van. (2014). Datafication, Dataism and Dataveillance: Big Data between Scientific Paradigm and Ideology. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v12i2.4776 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  6. Dijck, J. van, Poell, T., & Waal, M. de. (2018). The Platform Society: Public Values in a Connective World. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190889760.001.0001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  7. Domahidi, E., Yang, J., Niemann-Lenz, J., & Reinecke, L. (2019). Computational Communication Science | Outlining the Way Ahead in Computational Communication Science: An Introduction to the IJoC Special Section on “Computational Methods for Communication Science: Toward a Strategic Roadmap”. International Journal of Communication, 13, 3876–3884. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/10533 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  8. Hase, V., Boczek, K., & Scharkow, M. (2023). Adapting to Affordances and Audiences? A Cross-Platform, Multi-Modal Analysis of the Platformization of News on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter. Digital Journalism, 11(8), 1499–1520. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2022.2128389 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  9. Li, M., Suk, J., Zhang, Y., Pevehouse, J. C., Sun, Y., Kwon, H., Lian, R., Wang, R., Dong, X., & Shah, D. V. (2024). Platform Affordances, Discursive Opportunities, and Social Media Activism: A Cross-Platform Analysis of #MeToo on Twitter, Facebook, and Reddit, 2017–2020. New Media & Society, 28(1), 119–147. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241285562 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  10. Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think (S. 242). Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  11. Spirling, A. (2023). Why Open-Source Generative AI Models Are an Ethical Way Forward for Science. Nature, 616(7957), 413. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-01295-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  12. Theocharis, Y., Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., & Bimber, B. (2023). Platform Affordances and Political Participation: How Social Media Reshape Political Engagement. West European Politics, 46(4), 788–811. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402382.2022.2087410 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  13. Welbers, K., & Opgenhaffen, M. (2019). Presenting News on Social Media: Media Logic in the Communication Style of Newspapers on Facebook. Digital Journalism, 7(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2018.1493939 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-3
  14. agma (2025a). Das Allmedia-Dach der agma. https://www.agma-mmc.de/medien-analyse [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  15. agma (2025b). Aufgaben und Ziele der agma. https://www.agma-mmc.de/ueber/agma/aufgaben-ziele [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  16. Averbeck-Lietz, S. & Löblich, M. (2017). Kommunikationswissenschaft vergleichend und transnational. Eine Einführung. In S. Averbeck-Lietz (Hrsg.), Kommunikationswissenschaft im internationalen Vergleich. Transnationale Perspektiven (S. 1–29). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  17. Bastos, Marco T. (2025). So Long Twitter, and Thanks for all the Tweets (March 05, 2025). http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5206365 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  18. Bönisch, J. (2006). Meinungsführer oder Populärmedium? Das journalistische Profil von Spiegel Online. Lit-Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  19. Bosnjak, M., Dannwolf, T., Enderle, T., Schaurer, I., Struminskaya, B., Tanner, A., & Weyandt, K. W. (2017). Establishing an Open Probability-Based Mixed-Mode Panel of the General Population in Germany: The GESIS Panel. Social Science Computer Review, 36(1), 103-115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439317697949 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  20. Bowman, N. D., Rinke, E. M., Lee, E. J., Nabi, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2022). How Communication Scholars See Open Scholarship. Annals of the International Communication Association, 46(3), 205–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2022.2108880 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  21. Breiter, A., & Hepp, A. (2018). Die Komplexität der Datafizierung: Zur Herausforderung, digitale Spuren in ihrem Kontext zu analysieren. In C. Katzenbach, C. Pentzold, S. Kannengießer, M. Adolf, & M. Taddicken (Hrsg.), Neue Komplexitäten für Kommunikationsforschung und Medienanalyse: Analytische Zugänge und empirische Studien (S. 27–48). Berlin. https://doi.org/10.17174/dcr.v4.2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  22. Brentel, I., & Jandura, O. (2018). Media-Analyse: Radio. Langfristdaten [Datensatz]. https://doi.org/10.7802/1620 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  23. Brosius, H.-B. (1994). Integrations- oder Einheitsfach? Die Publikationsaktivitäten von Autoren der Zeitschriften „Publizistik“ und „Rundfunk und Fernsehen“ 1983–1992. Publizistik, 39, 73–90. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  24. Brosius, H.-B., & Haas, A. (2009). Auf dem Weg zur Normalwissenschaft. Publizistik, 54, 168–190. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  25. Bruns, A. (2019). After the ‘APIcalypse’: Social Media Platforms and their Fight against Critical Scholarly Research. Information, Communication & Society, 22(11), 1544–1566. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1637447 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  26. Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The Mediated Construction of Reality. John Wiley & Sons. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  27. Debatin, B. & Rath, M. (Hrsg.) (2014). Die Blindheit der Gutachterei. Debatte. Aviso, 59, 2–9. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  28. Dienlin, T., Johannes, N., Bowman, N. D., Masur, P. K., Engesser, S., Kümpel, A. S., Lukito, J., Bier, L. M., Zhang, R., Johnson, B. K., Huskey, R., Schneider, F. M., Breuer, J., Parry, D. A., Vermeulen, I., Fisher, J. T., Banks, J., Weber, R., Ellis, D. A., Smits, T., Ivory, J. D., Trepte, S., McEwan, B., Rinke, E. M., Neubaum, G., Winter, S., Carpenter, C. J., Krämer, N., Utz, S., Unkel, J., Wang, X., Davidson, B. I., Kim, N., Won, A. S., Domahidi, E., Lewis, N. A., & de Vreese, C. (2021). An Agenda for Open Science in Communication. Journal of Communication, 71, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz052 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  29. Domahidi, E., Yang, JH, Niemann-Lenz, J. & Reinecke, L. (2019). Outlining the Way Ahead in Computational Communication Science: An Introduction to the IJoC Special Section on “Computational Methods for Communication Science: Toward a Strategic Roadmap”. International Journal of Communication, 13, 3876–3884. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  30. Donsbach, W., Laub, T., Haas, A. & Brosius, H.-B. (2005). Anpassungsprozesse in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Themen und Herkunft der Forschung in den Fachzeitschriften „Publizistik“ und „Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft“. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 53, 46–72. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  31. Döveling, K., Sommer, D., Robinson, K., & Suter, L. (2024). Mediatization and Entertainment. In N. D. Bowman (Ed.), Entertainment Media and Communication (S. 505–520). DeGruyter | Mouton. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  32. Filipović, A. (2015). Die Datafizierung der Welt. Eine ethische Vermessung des digitalen Wandels. Communicatio Socialis, 48, 6–15. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  33. gesis.org (2025). Datenerhebung mit dem GESIS Panel.dbd. https://www.gesis.org/gesis-panel/datenerhebung/datenerhebung-gesis-paneldbd [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  34. Goebel, J., Grabka, M. M., Liebig, S., Kroh, M., Richter, D., Schröder, C. & Schupp, J. (2019). The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP). Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, 239(2), 345–360. https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2018-0022 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  35. Haas, A., Karnowski, V., & Peter, C. (2018). Hans-Bernd Brosius und die deutschsprachige Kommunikationswissenschaft. In P. Rössler & C. Rossmann (Hrsg.), Kumulierte Evidenzen (S. 225–244). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  36. Hagenah, J. (2005). Der Media-Analyse-Datenservice des Medienwissenschaftlichen Lehr- und Forschungszentrums (MLFZ), Universität zu Köln. Publizistik, 50, 116. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  37. Hagenah, J. (2006a). Möglichkeiten der Nutzung von Media-Analyse Radiodaten für Sekundäranalysen von 1972 bis heute. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 54, 457–485. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  38. Hagenah, J. (2006b). Möglichkeiten der Nutzung von Media-Analyse Fernsehdaten für Sekundäranalysen von 1972 bis heute. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 54, 637–653. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  39. Hagenah, J., & Akinci, H. (2003). Sekundäranalysen der Daten der Media-Analyse mit Hilfe des Serviceangebots des Medienwissenschaftlichen Lehr- und Forschungszentrums (MLFZ). ZA-Information 53, 182–190. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  40. Hagenah, J., & Meulemann, H. (2009). The Analytical Potentials of Trend Survey Data from Market Research. The Case of German Media Analysis Data. Historical Social Research, 34, 49–61. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  41. Hagenah, J., & Meulemann, H. (Hrsg.) (2006). Sozialer Wandel und Mediennutzung in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland. LIT Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  42. Hagenah, J., & Meulemann, H. (Hrsg.) (2008). Alte und neue Medien – Zum Wandel der Medienpublika in Deutschland seit den 1950er Jahren. LIT Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  43. Hagenah, J., & Meulemann, H. (Hrsg.) (2012). Mediatisierung der Gesellschaft? LIT Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  44. Hagenah, J., Meulemann, H., & Akinci, H. (2006). German Media-Analyse (MA): A Large-Scale Commercial Data Source Available for Secondary Analyses on Media Use and Social Change. Schmollers Jahrbuch, 126, 129–137. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  45. Hagenah, J., Niemetz, S. & Sommer, D. (2023). Initiative zur Gründung eines Forschungsdatenzentrums Medien [Posterpräsentation] „Stunde der Forschung“ zum 30. Jubiläum der Fakultät Verkehr – Sport – Tourismus – Medien, Ostfalia Hochschule für angewandte Wissenschaften, 06.05.2023, Salzgitter. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  46. Haim, M. (2023). Computational Communication Science. Eine Einführung. Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  47. Haim, M., & Jungblut M. (2023). How Open is Communication Science? Open-Science Principles in the Field. Annals of the International Communication Association. 47(3), 338–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2023.2201601 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  48. Hartmann, F. G., Kopp, J., & Lois, D. (2022). Sozialwissenschaftliche Datenanalyse. Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  49. Hauser, R., Wagner, G. G. & Zimmermann, K. F. (1998). Memorandum: Erfolgsbedingungen empirischer Wirtschaftsforschung und empirisch gestützter wirtschafts- und sozialpolitischer Beratung. IZA Discussion Paper No. 14. In Allgemeines Statistisches Archiv, 82, 369–379. https://docs.iza.org/dp14.pdf [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  50. Jandura, O., & Brentel, I. (2018). Media-Analyse: Pressemedien – Langfristdaten [Datensatz]. https://doi.org/10.7802/1631 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  51. Kämper E., & Brüggemann, A. (2009). Large Scale Studies in den deutschen Sozialwissenschaften: Stand und Perspektiven. Bericht über einen Workshop der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (RatSWD Working Paper Series, 114). Berlin. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  52. Koenen, E. & Sanko, C. (2017). Die Mediengesellschaft und ihre Wissenschaft im Wandel. Disziplinäre Genese und Wandelprozesse der Kommunikationswissenschaft in Deutschland 1945–2015. In S. Averbeck-Lietz (Hrsg.), Kommunikationswissenschaft im internationalen Vergleich. Transnationale Perspektiven (S. 113–159). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  53. konsortswd.de (2025a). Entwicklung des RatSWD. Die Anfänge des RatSWD reichen in das Jahr 1998 zurück. https://www.konsortswd.de/ueber-uns/ratswd/entwicklung/ [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  54. konsortswd.de (2025b). Übersicht Datenzentren. Die vom RatSWD akkreditierten Forschungsdatenzentren (FDZ) ermöglichen der Wissenschaft einen flexiblen und umfangreichen Zugang zu sensiblen Daten. https://www.konsortswd.de/angebote/forschende/alle-datenzentren/ [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  55. Krotz, F. (2017). Mediatisierung: Ein Forschungskonzept. In F. Krotz, C. Despotović, & M. M. Kruse (Hrsg.), Mediatisierung als Metaprozess. Transformationen, Formen der Entwicklung und die Generierung von Neuem (S. 13–32). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  56. Krüger, K. (2021). Die Ära der Datafizierung. Medieninnovation als Wandel der Medientypologien. Springer VS. doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-34019-3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  57. Lauf, E. (2002). Freiheit für die Daten! Sekundäranalysen und Datenbestände in der deutschen Medien- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 50, 247–260, https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2002-2-247 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  58. Löblich, M. (2010). Die empirisch-sozialwissenschaftliche Wende: Ein Beitrag zur historischen und kognitiven Identität der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 58, 544–562. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634x-2010-4-544 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  59. Matthes, J., Kuhlmann, C., Gehrau, V., Jandura, O., Möhring, W., Vogelgesang, J., & Wünsch, C. (2011). Zur Methodenausbildung in kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Bachelor- und Masterstudiengängen. Empfehlungen einer Kommission im Auftrag der Fachgruppe Methoden der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft. Publizistik, 56, 461–481. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-011-0133-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  60. Matthes, J., Kuhlmann, C., Gehrau, V., Jandura, O., Möhring, W., Vogelgesang, J. & Wünsch, C. (2012). Schwerpunkte ermöglichen – eine Antwort auf die Stellungnahme von Krotz, Keppler, Meyen, Neumann-Braun und Wagner. Publizistik, 57, 225–227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-012-0149-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  61. Mauer, R. (2012). Das GESIS Datenarchiv für Sozialwissenschaften. In R. Altenhöner, & C. Oellers (Hrsg.), Langzeitarchivierung von Forschungsdaten: Standards und disziplinspezifische Lösungen (S. 197-215). Scivero. https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-46476-7 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  62. Meulemann, H., & Hagenah, J. (2010). Mass Media Research. In RatSWD (Hrsg.), Building on Progress: Expanding the Research Infrastructure for the Social, Economic and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 2 (S. 1173–1196). Budrich. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  63. Mochmann, E. (2022). Quantitative Daten für die Sekundäranalyse. In N. Baur, & J. Blasius (Hrsg), Handbuch Methoden der empirischen Sozialforschung (S. 283–294). Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  64. Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A. L., & Nielsen, R. K. (2017). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2017. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  65. Pohle, J. (2019). Zu den gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen zunehmender Verdatung und Automation: Erkenntnisse aus der Frühzeit und Hochphase der Datenschutzdebatte. In N. Burzan (Hrsg.), Komplexe Dynamiken globaler und lokaler Entwicklungen: Verhandlungen des 39. Kongresses der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie in Göttingen 2018. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie (DGS). https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.101126 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  66. Prinzing, M., & Herczeg, P. (Hrsg.) (2023). Publikationsstrategien in der KoWi: Wie publizieren? Debattenschwerpunkt. Aviso, 77, 3–13. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  67. Quandt, T. (2008). (No) News on the World Wide Web? A comparative content analysis of online news in Europe and the United States. Journalism Studies, 9(5), 717–738. doi.org/10.1080/14616700802207664 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  68. Riffe, D., & Freitag, A. (1997). A Content Analysis of Content Analyses: Twenty-five Years of Journalism Quarterly. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 515–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769909707400306 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  69. Schäfer, M.-S., & Rössler, P. (Hrsg.) (2014). Open Access in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Debatte. Aviso, 58, 2–11. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  70. Scharkow, M. (2011). Automatische Inhaltsanalyse und maschinelles Lernen. Dissertation: Universität der Künste. https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-udk/frontdoor/deliver/index/docId/28/file/dissertation_scharkow_final_udk.pdf [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  71. Scharkow, M. (2013). Thematic Content Analysis Using Supervised Machine Learning: An Empirical Evaluation Using German Online News. Quality & Quantity, 47, 761–773. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  72. Schneider, I., & Otto, I. (Hrsg.) (2007). Strategien der Verdatung. Formationen der Mediennutzung II. transcript. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  73. Simon, N., & Bernhardt, N. (2008). Twitter, mit 140 Zeichen zum Web 2.0. Open Source Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  74. Sommer, D., Hagenah, J., Strippel, C., & Brucks, A.-S. (2025). Frei und FAIR? Der Umgang mit Forschungsdaten in der deutschsprachigen Kommunikations- und Medienwissenschaft. [Posterpräsentation] 70. DGPuK-Jahrestagung, 20.03.25, Berlin. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  75. Strippel, C. (2021). Forschungsinfrastrukturen für die Kommunikations- und Medienforschung im deutschsprachigen Raum: Initiativen, Bedarfe und Perspektiven. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 69, 136–157. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2021-1-136 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  76. Strippel, C., & Domahidi, E. (Hrsg.) (2016). Internationalisierung in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Debatte. Aviso, 63, 2–11. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  77. Strippel, C., & Paasch-Colberg, S. (2020). Diskursarchitekturen deutscher Nachrichtenseiten. In V. Gehrau, A. Waldherr, & A. Scholl (Hrsg.), Integration durch Kommunikation (in einer digitalen Gesellschaft): Jahrbuch der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft 2019 (S. 153–165). Deutsche Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft e. V. https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.68129 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  78. Strippel, C., Bock, A., Katzenbach, C., Mahrt, M., Merten, L., Nuernbergk, C., Pentzold, C., Puschmann, C., & Waldherr, A. (2018). Die Zukunft der Kommunikationswissenschaft ist schon da, sie ist nur ungleich verteilt. Publizistik, 63, 11–27. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  79. Trilling, D. (2014). Weg vom manuellen Speichern: RSS-Feeds in der automatisierten Datenerhebung bei Online-Medien. In K. Sommer, M. Wettstein, W. Wirth, & J. Matthes (Hrsg.), Automatisierung in der Inhaltsanalyse (S. 73–89). Von Halem. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  80. Volk, S., Weinmann, C., & Vowe, G. (Hrsg.) (2022). Forschung im Team: Was bedeutet die „kollaborative Wende“ für die KW? Debatte. Aviso, 74, 3–10. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  81. von Oertzen, C. (2017). Die Historizität der Verdatung: Konzepte, Werkzeuge und Praktiken im 19. Jahrhundert. NTM – Zeitschrift für Geschichte der Wissenschaften, Technik und Medizin, 25, 407–434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00048-017-0183-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  82. Wagner, G. G., Frick, J. R., & Schupp, J. (2007). The German Socio-Economic Panel Study (SOEP) – Scope, Evolution and Enhancements. Schmollers Jahrbuch, 127(1), 139–169. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  83. Waldherr, A. (2019). Messinstrumente und Sinnkonstruktionen. Methoden als Antreiber und Taktgeber der Kommunikationswissenschaft. medien & zeit, 34, 40–47. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  84. Wissenschaftsrat (2021). Stellungnahme zum Antrag auf strategische Erweiterung von GESIS – Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Mannheim und Köln, großer strategischer Sondertatbestand im Rahmen der Ausführungsvereinbarung WGL. https://www.wissenschaftsrat.de/download/2021/8820-21.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=8#page=13 [08.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-8
  85. Adam, S., Makhortykh, M., Maier, M., Aigenseer, V., Urman, A., Gil Lopez, T., Christner, C., de León, E., & Ulloa, R. (2024). Improving the quality of individual-level web tracking: Challenges of existing approaches and introduction of a new content and long-tail sensitive academic solution. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393241287793 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  86. AlDayel, A., & Magdy, W. (2021). Stance detection on Social Media: State of the art and trends. Information Processing & Management, 58(4), 102597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2021.102597 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  87. Andone, I., Błaszkiewicz, K., Eibes, M., Trendafilov, B., Montag, C., & Markowetz, A. (2016). How age and gender affect smartphone usage. Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct, 9–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2968219.2971451 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  88. Araujo, T., Wonneberger, A., Neijens, P., & de Vreese, C. (2017). How much time do you spend online? Understanding and improving the accuracy of self-reported measures of internet use. Communication Methods and Measures, 11(3), 173–190. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  89. Behre, J., Hölig, S., & Möller, J. (2024). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2024: Ergebnisse für Deutschland. Verlag Hans-Bredow-Institut. https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/94461 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  90. Bestvater, S. E., & Monroe, B. L. (2023). Sentiment is not stance: Target-aware opinion classification for political text analysis. Political Analysis, 31(2), 235–256. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2022.10 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  91. Böhmer, M., Hecht, B., Schöning, J., Krüger, A., & Bauer, G. (2011). Falling asleep with Angry Birds, Facebook and Kindle: A large scale study on mobile application usage. Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, 47–56. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  92. Bosch, O. J., Sturgis, P., Kuha, J., & Revilla, M. (2024). Uncovering digital trace data biases: Tracking undercoverage in web tracking data. Communication Methods and Measures, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2024.2393165 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  93. Breiter, A., & Hepp, A. (2018). The complexity of datafication: Putting digital traces in context. Communicative figurations: Transforming communications in times of deep mediatization, 387–405. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  94. Christner, C., Urman, A., Adam, S., & Maier, M. (2022). Automated tracking approaches for studying online media use: A critical review and recommendations. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(2), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1907841 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  95. Clemm von Hohenberg, B., Stier, S., Cardenal, A. S., Guess, A. M., Menchen-Trevino, E., & Wojcieszak, M. (2024). Analysis of web browsing data: A guide. Social Science Computer Review, 42(6), 1479–1504. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393241227868 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  96. Fan, Y., Tu, Z., Li, T., Cao, H., Xia, T., Li, Y., Chen, X., & Zhang, L. (2021). Understanding the long-term dynamics of mobile app usage context via graph embedding. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 35(3). https://doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2021.3110141 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  97. Ferreira, D., Kostakos, V., & Dey, A. K. (2015). AWARE: Mobile context instrumentation framework. Frontiers in ICT, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/fict.2015.00006 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  98. Freelon, D. (2014). On the interpretation of digital trace data in communication and social computing research. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 58(1), 59–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.875018 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  99. Freelon, D. (2018). Computational research in the post-API age. Political Communication, 35(4), 665–668. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1477506 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  100. Freelon, D., Pruden, M. L., Malmer, D., Wu, Q., Xia, Y., Johnson, D., Chen, E., & Crist, A. (2024). What’s in your PIE? Understanding the contents of personalized information environments with PIEGraph. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 75(10), 1119–1133. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24869 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  101. Frisson, C., Malacria, S., Bailly, G., & Dutoit, T. (2016). Inspectorwidget: A system to analyze users’ behaviors in their applications. 1548–1554. https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2892388 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  102. Gitelman, L. (Ed.). (2013). “Raw data” Is an oxymoron. MIT Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  103. Görland, S. (2020). Medien, Zeit und Beschleunigung: Mobile Mediennutzung in Interimszeiten. Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  104. Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2020). Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 472–480. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0833-x Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  105. Hasebrink, U., & Popp, J. (2006). Media repertoires as a result of selective media use. A conceptual approach to the analysis of patterns of exposure. Communications, 31(3), 369–387. https://doi.org/10.1515/COMMUN.2006.023 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  106. Hong, J. I., Boriello, G., Landay, J. A., McDonald, D. W., Schilit, B. N., & Tygar, J. D. (2003). Privacy and security in the location-enhanced world wide web. Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing: Ubicomp, https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=MoFbcc0AAAAJ&cstart=300&pagesize=100&sortby=pubdate&citation_for_view=MoFbcc0AAAAJ:4TOpqqG69KYC. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  107. Jungherr, A. (2015). Analyzing political communication with digital trace data: The role of twitter messages in social science research. Springer. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  108. Jungherr, A., & Theocharis, Y. (2017). The empiricist’s challenge: Asking meaningful questions in political science in the age of big data. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 14(2), 97–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2017.1312187 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  109. Jürgens, P., & Stark, B. (2022). Mapping exposure diversity: The divergent effects of algorithmic curation on news consumption. Journal of Communication, 72(3), 322–344. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqac009 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  110. Krieter, P. (2019). Can I record your screen? Mobile screen recordings as a long-term data source for user studies. 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3365610.3365618 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  111. Krieter, P. (2020). Looking inside—mobile screen recordings as a privacy friendly long-term data source to analyze user behavior. Universität Bremen. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/103 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  112. Krieter, P., Zerrer, P., Puschmann, C., & Geise, S. (2024). Following topics across all apps and media formats: Mobile keyword tracking as a privacy-friendly data source in mobile media research. Adjunct Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, 126–131. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  113. Kühnemann, H. (2021). Anwendungen des Web Scraping in der amtlichen Statistik. AStA Wirtschafts- Und Sozialstatistisches Archiv, 15(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11943-021-00280-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  114. Kulshrestha, J., Oliveira, M., Karaçalık, O., Bonnay, D., & Wagner, C. (2021). Web routineness and limits of predictability: Investigating demographic and behavioral differences using web tracking data. 15, 327–338. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2012.15112 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  115. Liu, B. (2012). Sentiment analysis and opinion mining. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-02145-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  116. Maier, M., Adam, S., Gil Lopez, T., Makhortykh, M., Bromme, L., Christner, C., de León, E., & Urman, A. (2025). Populist radical-right attitudes, political involvement and selective information consumption: Who tunes out and who prefers attitude-consonant information. Mass Communication and Society, 28(1), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/15205436.2024.2310156 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  117. McMillan, D., McGregor, M., & Brown, B. (2015). From in the wild to in vivo: Video Analysis of Mobile Device Use. 494–503. https://doi.org/10.1145/2785830.2785883 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  118. Meijer, C. I., & Kormelink, G. T. (2015). Checking, sharing, clicking and linking: Changing patterns of news use between 2004 and 2014. Digital Journalism, 3(5), 664–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.937149 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  119. Menchen-Trevino, E., & and Karr, C. (2012). Researching real-world web use with roxy: Collecting observational web data with informed consent. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(3), 254–268. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2012.664966 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  120. Merten, L. (2021). Block, hide or follow—Personal news curation practices on social media. Digital Journalism, 9(8), 1018–1039. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1829978 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  121. Möller, J., van de Velde, R. N., Merten, L., & Puschmann, C. (2020). Explaining online news engagement based on browsing behavior: Creatures of habit? Social Science Computer Review, 38(5), 616–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319828012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  122. Muise, D., Markowitz, D., Reeves, B., Ram, N., & Robinson, T. (2024). (Mis) measurement of political content exposure within the smartphone ecosystem: Investigating common assumptions. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 4. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  123. Munzert, S., & Nyhuis, D. (2019). Die Nutzung von Webdaten in den Sozialwissenschaften. In C. Wagemann, A. Goerres, & M. Siewert (Eds.), Handbuch Methoden der Politikwissenschaft (pp. 1–25). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-16937-4_22-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  124. Naab, T. K., Karnowski, V., & Schlütz, D. (2019). Reporting mobile social media use: How survey and experience sampling measures differ. Communication Methods and Measures, 13(2), 126–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1555799 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  125. Ohme, J., Araujo, T., Boeschoten, L., Freelon, D., Ram, N., Reeves, B. B., & Robinson, T. N. (2024). Digital trace data collection for social media effects research: APIs, data donation, and (screen) tracking. Communication Methods and Measures, 18(2), 124–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2181319 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  126. Parry, D., Davidson, B., Sewall, C., Fisher, J., Mieczkowski, H., & Quintana, D. (2021). A systematic review and meta-analysis of discrepancies between logged and self-reported digital media use. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 1535–1547. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01117-5 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  127. Parry, D., & Toth, R. (2025). Extracting meaningful measures of smartphone usage from Android event log data: A methodological primer. Computational Communication Research, 7(1), 1. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  128. Peng, T.-Q., & Zhu, J. J. H. (2020). Mobile phone use as sequential processes: From discrete behaviors to sessions of behaviors and trajectories of sessions. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun., 25(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz029 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  129. Perriam, J., Birkbak ,Andreas, & and Freeman, A. (2020). Digital methods in a post-API environment. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 23(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1682840 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  130. Reeves, B., Ram, N., Robinson, T. N., Cummings, J. J., Giles, C. L., Pan, J., Chiatti, A., Cho, M., Roehrick, K., & Yang, X. (2021). Screenomics: A framework to capture and analyze personal life experiences and the ways that technology shapes them. Human–Computer Interaction, 36(2), 150–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2019.1578652 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  131. Richter, S., & Stier, S. (2022). Learning about the unknown Spitzenkandidaten: The role of media exposure during the 2019 European Parliament elections. European Union Politics, 23(2), 309–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/14651165211051171 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  132. Riebling, J. (2019). The medium data problem in social science. In C. M. Stützer, M. Welker, & M. Egger (Eds.), Computational Social Science in the Age of Big Data. Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications (pp. 77–103). Herbert von Halem Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  133. Scharkow, M. (2016). The accuracy of self-reported internet use—A validation study using client log data. Communication Methods and Measures, 10(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2015.1118446 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  134. Sen, I., Flöck, F., Weller, K., Weiß, B., & Wagner, C. (2021). A total error framework for digital traces of human behavior on online platforms. Public Opinion Quarterly, 85(S1), 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfab018 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  135. Spiekermann, S., & Cranor, L. F. (2009). Engineering privacy. IEEE transactions on software engineering, 35(1), 67–82. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2008.88 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  136. Stier, S., Bleier, A., Bonart, M., Mörsheim, F., Bohlouli, M., Nizhegorodov, M., Posch, L., Maier, J., Rothmund, T., & Staab, S. (2018). Systematically monitoring social media: The case of the German federal election 2017 (GESIS Papers). GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften. https://doi.org/10.21241/ssoar.56149 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  137. Stier, S., Breuer, J., Siegers, P., & Thorson, K. (2020). Integrating survey data and digital trace data: Key issues in developing an emerging field. Social Science Computer Review, 38(5), 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319843669 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  138. Stier, S., Kirkizh, N., Froio, C., & Schroeder, R. (2020). Populist attitudes and selective exposure to online news: A cross-country analysis combining web tracking and surveys. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(3), 194016122090701. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220907018 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  139. Stier, S., Mangold, F., Scharkow, M., & Breuer, J. (2021). Post post-broadcast democracy? News exposure in the age of online intermediaries. American Political Science Review, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055421001222 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  140. Tong, L., Mingyang, Z., Hancheng, C., Yong, L., Sasu, T., & Pan, H. (2020). What apps did you use? : Understanding the long-term evolution of mobile app usage. 66–76. https://doi.org/10.1145/3366423.3380095 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  141. Tong, L., Tong, X., Huandong, W., Zhen, T., Sasu, T., Zhu, H., & Pan, H. (2022). Smartphone app usage analysis: Datasets, methods, and applications. IEEE communications surveys and tutorials, 24(2), 937–966. https://doi.org/10.1109/comst.2022.3163176 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  142. Toth, R., & Trifonova, T. (2021). Somebody’s watching me: Smartphone use ttracking and reactivity. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 4, 100142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100142 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  143. Trezza, D. (2023). To scrape or not to scrape, this is dilemma. The post-API scenario and implications on digital research. Frontiers in Sociology, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1145038 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  144. von Andrian-Werburg, M. T., Siegers, P., & Breuer, J. (2023). A Re-evaluation of Online Pornography Use in Germany: A Combination of Web Tracking and Survey Data Analysis. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-023-02666-8 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  145. Wieland, M. (2023). Informiert oder (doch nur) abgelenkt? Potenziale und Herausforderungen automatisierter Nachrichtenkontakte in mobilen sozialen Medien. Herbert von Halem Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  146. Wojcieszak, M., de Leeuw, S., Menchen-Trevino, E., Lee, S., Huang-Isherwood, K. M., & Weeks, B. (2023). No polarization from partisan news: Over-time evidence from trace data. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 28(3), 601–626. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612211047194 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  147. Yee, A. Z. H., Yu, R., Lim, S. S., Lim, K. H., Dinh, T. T. A., Loh, L., Hadianto, A., & Quizon, M. (2023). ScreenLife Capture: An open-source and user-friendly framework for collecting screenomes from Android smartphones. Behavior Research Methods, 55(8), 4068–4085. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-02006-z Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  148. Zerrer, P. T. (2024). Political action and news use of the Fridays for Future movement in Germany. https://doi.org/10.26092/elib/3604 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  149. Zerrer, P., Puschmann, C., & Pressmann, P. (2025, January 28). German Politics Online: A List of social media accounts. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/A7SJD Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  150. Zhu, J. J. H., Chen, H., Peng, T.-Q., Liu, X. F., & Dai, H. (2018). How to measure sessions of mobile phone use? Quantification, evaluation, and applications. Mobile Media & Communication, 6(2), 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157917748351 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-31
  151. Barabasi, Albert-László, and Reka Albert. 1999. Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science, 286(5439), 509–512. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.286.5439.509 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  152. Berners-Lee, Tim. 1994. “Universal Resource Identifiers in WWW: A Unifying Syntax for the Expression of Names and Addresses of Objects on the Network as Used in the World-Wide Web.” Request for {{Comments}} RFC 1630. Internet Engineering Task Force. https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC1630 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  153. Berry, David. 2011. The computational turn: Thinking about the digital humanities. CULTURE MACHINE, 12. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  154. boyd, danah m., and Nicole B. Ellison. 2007. “Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (1): 210–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  155. Bossetta, Michael. 2019. The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election (No. arXiv:1904.07333). arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1904.07333 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  156. Breiter, Andreas, and Andreas Hepp. 2018. “The Complexity of Datafication: Putting Digital Traces in Context.” In Communicative Figurations: Transforming Communications in Times of Deep Mediatization, edited by Andreas Hepp, Andreas Breiter, and Uwe Hasebrink, 387–405. Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research. Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65584-0_16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  157. Brin, Sergey, Rajeev Motwani, Lawrence Page, and Terry Winograd. 1998. “What Can You Do with a Web in Your Pocket?” IEEE Data Eng. Bull. 21 (2): 37–47. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  158. Brüggemann, Michael, and Hendrik Meyer. 2023. “When Debates Break Apart: Discursive Polarization as a Multi-Dimensional Divergence Emerging in and Through Communication.” Communication Theory 33 (2–3): 132–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtad012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  159. Bruns, Axel. 2008. “Life Beyond the Public Sphere: Towards a Networked Model for Political Deliberation.” Information Polity 13: 71–85. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  160. Bruns, Axel. 2019. After the ‘APIcalypse’: Social media platforms and their fight against critical scholarly research. Information, Communication & Society, 22(11), 1544–1566. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1637447 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  161. Bruns, Axel. 2023. “From ‘the’ Public Sphere to a Network of Publics: Towards an Empirically Founded Model of Contemporary Public Communication Spaces.” Communication Theory 33 (2–3): 70–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtad007 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  162. Bruns, Axel, and Jean Burgess. 2011. “The Use of Twitter Hashtags in the Formation of Ad Hoc Publics.” In Proceedings of the 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) General Conference 2011, edited by A. Bruns and P. De Wilde, 1–9. United Kingdom: The European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR). Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  163. Bruns, Axel, Kateryna Kasianenko, Vish Padinjaredath Suresh, Ehsan Dehghan, and Laura Vodden. 2025. Untangling the Furball: A Practice Mapping Approach to the Analysis of Multimodal Interactions in Social Networks. Social Media + Society, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251331748 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  164. Bruns, Axel, and Brenda Moon. 2019. “One Day in the Life of a National Twittersphere.” Nordicom Review 40 (s1): 11–30. https://doi.org/10.2478/nor-2019-0011 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  165. Bruns, Axel, Brenda Moon, Felix Victor Münch, and Troy Sadkowsky. 2017. “The Australian Twittersphere in 2016: Mapping the Follower/Followee Network.” Social Media + Society, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117748162. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  166. “Common Crawl – Overview.” n.d. https://commoncrawl.org/overview. Accessed January 28, 2026. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  167. Coscia, Michele, and Luca Rossi. 2018. “Benchmarking API Costs of Network Sampling Strategies.” In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data), 663–72. https://doi.org/10.1109/BigData.2018.8622486 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  168. Esau, Katharina, Tariq Choucair, Samantha Vilkins, Sebastian F. K. Svegaard, Axel Bruns, Kate S. O’Connor-Farfan, and Carly Lubicz-Zaorski. 2024. “Destructive Polarization in Digital Communication Contexts: A Critical Review and Conceptual Framework.” Information, Communication & Society 0 (0): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2413127 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  169. Freelon, Deen. 2021. “The Post-API Age Reconsidered: Web Science in the ’20s and Beyond.” In 13th ACM Web Science Conference 2021, 3–3. Virtual Event United Kingdom: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447535.3466177. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  170. Friemel, Thomas N, and Christoph Neuberger. 2023. “The Public Sphere as a Dynamic Network.” Communication Theory 33 (2–3): 92–101. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtad003 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  171. Frischlich, Lena, & Edda Humprecht (2021). Trust, Democratic Resilience, and the Infodemic. https://doi.org/10.5167/UZH-202660 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  172. Goodman, Leo A. 1961. “Snowball Sampling.” The Annals of Mathematical Statistics 32 (1): 148–70. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177705148 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  173. Guan, Lu, Xiao Fan Liu, Wujiu Sun, Hai Liang, and Jonathan Zhu. 2022. “Census of Twitter Users: Scraping and Describing the National Network of South Korea.” PLOS ONE 17 (November): e0277549. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0277549 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  174. Habermas, Jürgen. 1962. Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit – Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. 1990th ed. Suhrkamp. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  175. Hasebrink, Uwe, and Andreas Hepp. 2017. “How to Research Cross-Media Practices? Investigating Media Repertoires and Media Ensembles.” Convergence, 23(4): 362–77. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517700384 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  176. Heft, Annett, Kilian Buehling, Xixuan Zhang, Juni Schindler, and Miriam Milzner. 2024. Challenges of and Approaches to Data Collection across Platforms and Time: Conspiracy-Related Digital Traces as Examples of Political Contention. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 21(3), 323–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2023.2250779 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  177. Helmond, Anne. 2015. “The Platformization of the Web: Making Web Data Platform Ready.” Social Media + Society 1 (2): 205630511560308. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603080 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  178. Hepp, Andreas, and Uwe Hasebrink. 2014. Kommunikative Figurationen – ein Ansatz zur Analyse der Transformation mediatisierter Gesellschaften und Kulturen. In Von der Gutenberg-Galaxis zur Google-Galaxis: Alte und neue Grenzvermessungen nach 50 Jahren DGPuK (pp. 343–360). UVK Verlagsgesellschaft. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  179. Hu, Pili, and Wing Cheong Lau. 2013. “A Survey and Taxonomy of Graph Sampling.” arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1308.5865 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  180. Jost, Pablo, Annett Heft, Kilian Buehling, Maximilian Zehring, Heidi Schulze, Hendrik Bitzmann, and Emese Domahidi. 2023. “Mapping a Dark Space: Challenges in Sampling and Classifying Non-Institutionalized Actors on Telegram.” M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft 71(3–4): 212–29. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2023-3-4-212 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  181. Kivelä, Mikko, Alex Arenas, Marc Barthelemy, James P. Gleeson, Yamir Moreno, and Mason A. Porter. 2014. “Multilayer Networks.” Journal of Complex Networks, 2(3): 203–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/comnet/cnu016 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  182. Lazer, David, Alex Pentland, Lada Adamic, Sinan Aral, Albert-László Barabási, Devon Brewer, Nicholas Christakis, Noshir Contractor, James Fowler, Myron Gutmann, Tony Jebara, Gary King, Michael Macy, Deb Roy and Marshall van Alstyne. 2009. Computational Social Science. Science, 323(5915), 721–723. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167742 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  183. Lazer, David, Alex Pentland, Duncan J. Watts, Sinan Aral, Susan Athey, Noshir Contractor, Deen Freelon, et al. 2020. “Computational Social Science: Obstacles and Opportunities.” Science 369 (6507): 1060–62. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaz8170 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  184. Leskovec, Jure, and Christos Faloutsos. 2006. “Sampling from Large Graphs.” In Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, 631–36. Philadelphia PA USA: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1150402.1150479 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  185. Münch, Felix Victor, Ben Thies, Cornelius Puschmann, and Axel Bruns. 2021. “Walking Through Twitter: Sampling a Language-Based Follow Network of Influential Twitter Accounts.” Social Media + Society, 7(1): 2056305120984475. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305120984475 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  186. Nielsen, Hendrik, Roy T. Fielding, and Tim Berners-Lee (1996). Hypertext Transfer Protocol – HTTP/1.0 (Request for Comments No. RFC 1945). Internet Engineering Task Force. https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC1945 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  187. Ohme, Jakob, Theo Araujo, Laura Boeschoten, Deen Freelon, Nilam Ram, Byron B. Reeves, and Thomas N. Robinson. 2023. “Digital Trace Data Collection for Social Media Effects Research: APIs, Data Donation, and (Screen) Tracking.” Communication Methods and Measures, 0 (0): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2023.2181319 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  188. Olteanu, Alexandra, Carlos Castillo, Fernando Diaz, and Emre Kıcıman. 2019. “Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries.” Frontiers in Big Data 2. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  189. Pearce, Wareen, Suay M. Özkula, Amanda K. Greene, Lauren Teeling, Jennifer S. Bansard, Janna Joceli Omena, and Elaine Teixeira Rabello. 2020. Visual Cross-Platform Analysis: Digital Methods to Research Social Media Images. Information, Communication & Society, 23(2), 161–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1486871 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  190. Quandt, Thorsten, Lena Frischlich, Svenja Boberg, and Tim Schatto-Eckrodt. 2019. Fake News. In The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies (pp. 1–6). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118841570.iejs0128 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  191. Rau, Jan Philipp, Philipp Kessling, Gregor Wiedemann, and Felix Victor Münch. 2025. “Research Data Access in the Context of Art. 40 DSA for the German Federal Election: A Mixed Experience at Best.” Frankfurt, Leizig. https://doi.org/10.58079/13ZE0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  192. Ricaud, Benjamin, Nicolas Aspert, and Volodymyr Miz. 2020. “Spikyball Sampling: Exploring Large Networks via an Inhomogeneous Filtered Diffusion.” arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2010.11786. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  193. Rogers, Richard 1996. “The Future of Science and Technology Studies on the Web.” EASST Review 15, 25–27. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  194. Rogers, Richard. 2010. “Mapping Public Web Space with the Issuecrawler.” In Digital Cognitive Technologies: Epistemology and Knowledge Society, edited by Claire Brossard and Bernard Rebers. London, England: Wiley. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  195. Rogers, Richard. 2023. “‘Serious Queries’ and ‘Editorial Epistemologies’.” In The Propagation of Misinformation in Social Media: A Cross-platform Analysis. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.5117/9789463720762 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  196. Schmidt, Jan-Hinrik. 2014. “Twitter and the Rise of Personal Publics.” In Twitter and Society, 3–14. New York, Washington, D.C., Bern. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  197. Schmidt, Jan-Hinrik, Lisa Merten, Uwe Hasebrink, Isabelle Petrich, and Amelie Rolfs (2017). Zur Relevanz von Online-Intermediären für die Meinungsbildung. Arbeitspapiere des Hans-Bredow-Instituts, 40, 107 S. https://doi.org/10.21241/SSOAR.71784 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  198. Sen, Indira, Fabian Flöck, Katrin Weller, Bernd Weiß, and Claudia Wagner. 2021. “A Total Error Framework for Digital Traces of Human Behavior on Online Platforms.” Public Opinion Quarterly 85 (S1): 399–422. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfab018 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  199. Strippel, Christian, Annekatrin Bock, Christian Katzenbach, Merja Mahrt, Lisa Merten, Christian Nuernbergk, Christian Pentzold, Cornelius Puschmann, and Annie Waldherr. 2018. “Die Zukunft der Kommunikationswissenschaft ist schon da, sie ist nur ungleich verteilt: Eine Kollektivreplik auf Beiträge im ,,Forum“ (Publizistik, Heft 3 und 4, 2016).” Publizistik 63, 11–27 (Januar). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-017-0398-5. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  200. Voudigari, Elli, Nikos Salamanos, Theodore Papageorgiou, and Emmanuel J. Yannakoudakis. 2016. “Rank Degree: An Efficient Algorithm for Graph Sampling.” Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, ASONAM 2016, 120–29. https://doi.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752223 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  201. Waldherr, Annie. 2017. “Öffentlichkeit als komplexes System. Theoretischer Entwurf und methodische Konsequenzen.” M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 65(3): 534–49. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2017-3-534 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  202. Wiedemann, Gregor, Felix Victor Münch, Jan Philipp Rau, Phillip Kessling, and Jan-Hinrik Schmidt. 2023. “Concept and Challenges of a Social Media Observatory as a DIY Research Infrastructure.” Publizistik, 201–223 August. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-023-00807-6. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  203. Wolf, J. L., Squillante, M. S., Yu, P. S., Sethuraman, J., & Ozsen, L. (2002, May 7). Optimal Crawling Strategies for Web Search Engines. WWW2002. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-52
  204. Baden, C., Pipal, C., Schoonvelde, M., & Van Der Velden, M. A. C. G. (2022). Three Gaps in Computational Text Analysis Methods for Social Sciences: A Research Agenda. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.2015574 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  205. Benoit, K., & Matsuo, A. (2017). spacyr: Wrapper to the “spacy” “NLP” library (1.2.1) [Software]. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=spacyr [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  206. Bentz, C., & Kiela, D. (2014). Measuring and Modelling Lexical Diversity across Languages [Conference presentation]. 5th UK Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Lancaster, UK. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  207. Bernhard-Harrer, J., Ashour, R., Eberl, J. M., Tolochko, P., & Boomgaarden, H. (2025). Beyond Standardization: A Comprehensive Review of Topic Modeling Validation Methods for Computational Social Science Research. Political Science Research and Methods, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2025.10008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  208. Blei, D. M. (2012). Probabilistic Topic Models. Communications of the ACM, 55(4), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1145/2133806.2133826 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  209. Chan, C.-H., Zeng, J., Wessler, H., Jungblut, M., Welbers, K., Bajjalieh, J. W., van Atteveldt, W., & Althaus, S. L. (2020). Reproducible Extraction of Cross-lingual Topics (rectr). Communication Methods and Measures, 14(4), 285–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2020.1812555 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  210. de Vries, E., Schoonvelde, M., & Schumacher, G. (2018). No Longer Lost in Translation: Evidence that Google Translate Works for Comparative Bag-of-Words Text Applications. Political Analysis, 26(4), 417–430. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.26 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  211. Eisele, A., & Chen, Y. (2010). MultiUN: A Multilingual Corpus from United Nation Documents. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), 2868–2872. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  212. Fortson, B. W. IV. (2011). Indo-European Language and Culture: An Introduction (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Indo-European+Language+and+Culture%3A+An+Introduction%2C+2nd+Edition-p-9781405188968 [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  213. Grootendorst, M. (2022). BERTopic: Neural Topic Modeling with a Class-Based TF-IDF Procedure. arXiv. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2203.05794 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  214. Günther, E. (2022). Topic Modeling: Algorithmische Themenkonzepte in Gegenstand und Methodik der Kommunikationswissenschaft. [Topic Modeling: Algorithmic Topic Concepts in the Subject and Methodology of Communication Science.] Herbert von Halem Verlag. https://www.halem-verlag.de/produkt/topic-modeling/ Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  215. Hallin, D. C., & Mancini, P. (Eds.). (2011). Comparing Media Systems Beyond the Western World (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139005098 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  216. Haim, M. (2023). Computational Communication Science: Eine Einführung. [Computational Communication Science: Introduction.] Springer VS. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-658-40171-9 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  217. Hanitzsch, T., Hanusch, F., Ramaprasad, J., & De Beer, A. S. (Eds.). (2019). Worlds of Journalism: Journalistic Cultures Around the Globe. Columbia University Press. https://doi.org/10.7312/hani18642 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  218. Hase, V., Mahl, D., Schäfer, M. S., & Keller, T. R. (2021). Climate Change in News Media across the Globe: An Automated Analysis of Issue Attention and Themes in Climate Change Coverage in 10 Countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change, 70, 102353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102353 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  219. Jacobi, C., van Atteveldt, W., & Welbers, K. (2016). Quantitative Analysis of Large Amounts of Journalistic Texts Using Topic Modelling. Digital Journalism, 4(1), 89–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2015.1093271 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  220. Kettunen, K. (2014). Can Type-Token Ratio be Used to Show Morphological Complexity of Languages? Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 21(3), 223–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2014.911506 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  221. Koltsova, O., & Pashakhin, S. (2020). Agenda Divergence in a Developing conflict: Quantitative Evidence from Ukrainian and Russian TV Newsfeeds. Media, War & Conflict, 13(3), 237–257. https://doi.org/10.1177/1750635219829876 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  222. Kotait, R. (2024). Richness Lost in Machine Translationese. The Egyptian Journal of Language Engineering, 11(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.21608/EJLE.2024.267336.1064 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  223. Licht, H. (2023). Cross-Lingual Classification of Political Texts Using Multilingual Sentence Embeddings. Political Analysis, 31(3), 366–379. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2022.29 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  224. Licht, H. & Lind, F. (2023). Going Cross-Lingual: A Guide to Multilingual Text Analysis. Computational Communication Research, 5(2), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.5117/CCR2023.2.2.LICH Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  225. Licht, H., Sczepanski, R., Laurer, M., & Bekmuratovna, A. (2024). No More Cost in Translation: Validating Open-Source Machine Translation for Quantitative Text Analysis. OSF. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/9trjs Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  226. Lind, F., Eberl, J., Eisele, O., Heidenreich, T., Galyga, S., & Boomgaarden, H. G. (2022). Building the Bridge: Topic Modeling for Comparative Research. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(2), 96–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1965973 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  227. Lucas, C. G., Nielsen, R. A., Roberts, M. E., Stewart, B., Alex, S., & Tingley, D. (2015). Computer-Assisted Text Analysis for Comparative Politics. Political Analysis, 23(2), 254–277. https://doi.org/10.1093/pan/mpu019 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  228. Maier, D., Baden, C., Stoltenberg, D., de Vries-Kedem, M., & Waldherr, A. (2022). Machine Translation vs. Multilingual Dictionaries Assessing Two Strategies for the Topic Modeling of Multilingual Text Collections. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(1), 19–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1955845 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  229. Maier, D., Waldherr, A., Miltner, P., Wiedemann, G., Niekler, A., Keinert, A., Pfetsch, B., Heyer, G., Reber, U., Häussler, T., Schmid-Petri, H., & Adam, S. (2018). Applying LDA Topic Modeling in Communication Research: Toward a Valid and Reliable Methodology. Communication Methods and Measures, 12(2–3), 93–118. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1430754 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  230. Reber, U. (2019). Overcoming Language Barriers: Assessing the Potential of Machine Translation and Topic Modeling for the Comparative Analysis of Multilingual Text Corpora. Communication Methods and Measures, 13(2), 102–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2018.1555798 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  231. Rinke, E. M., Dobbrick, T., Löb, C., Zirn, C., & Wessler, H. (2022). Expert-Informed Topic Models for Document Set Discovery. Communication Methods and Measures, 16(1), 39–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/19312458.2021.1920008 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  232. Roberts, M. E., Stewart, B., & Tingley, D. (2019). stm: An R Package for Structural Topic Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 91(2), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v091.i02 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  233. Tiedemann, J. (2012). Parallel Data, Tools and Interfaces in OPUS. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2012), 2214–2218. http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2012/pdf/463_Paper.pdf [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  234. Torres, M. (2024). A Framework for the Unsupervised and Semi-Supervised Analysis of Visual Frames. Political Analysis, 32(2), 199–220. https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2023.32 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  235. van Atteveldt, W., Trilling, D., & Arcila, C. (2022). Computational Analysis of Communication. Wiley Blackwell. https://cssbook.net/ [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  236. Vanmassenhove, E., Shterionov, D., & Way, A. (2019). Lost in Translation: Loss and Decay of Linguistic Richness in Machine Translation. Proceedings of Machine Translation Summit XVII: Research Track, 222–232. https://aclanthology.org/W19-6622/ [28.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  237. Wang, H., Wu, H., He, Z., Huang, L., & Church, K. W. (2022). Progress in Machine Translation. Engineering, 18, 143–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eng.2021.03.023 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  238. Windsor, L. C., Cupit, J. G., & Windsor, A. J. (2019). Automated Content Analysis across Six Languages. PLOS One, 14(11), e0224425. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224425 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  239. Yoo, M. H., Kim, J., & Song, S. (2025). Multilingual Capabilities of GPT: A Study of Structural Ambiguity. PloS one, 20(7), e0326943. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0326943 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-71
  240. Agar, M. (2006). An ethnography by any other name ... Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, Vol 7, No 4 (2006): Qualitative Research in Ibero America. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-7.4.177 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  241. Allert, H. (2020). Plattformökonomie und Entstaatlichung: Familienorientiert, ortsunabhängig und #freilernend. In V. Dander, P. Bettinger, E. Ferraro, & K. Rummler (Eds), Digitalisierung – Subjekt – Bildung. Kritische Betrachtungen der digitalen Transformation (pp. 183–212). Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvvb7n3h.13 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  242. Bates, J., Lin, Y.-W., & Goodale, P. (2016). Data journeys: Capturing the socio-material constitution of data objects and flows. Big Data & Society, 3(2), 2053951716654502. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716654502 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  243. Binz, M., Alaniz, S., Roskies, A., Aczel, B., Bergstrom, C. T., Allen, C., Schad, D., Wulff, D., West, J. D., Zhang, Q., Shiffrin, R. M., Gershman, S. J., Popov, V., Bender, E. M., Marelli, M., Botvinick, M. M., Akata, Z., & Schulz, E. (2025). How should the advancement of large language models affect the practice of science? Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(5), e2401227121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2401227121 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  244. Bock, A., Breiter, A., Hartong, S., Jarke, J., Jornitz, S., Lange, A., & Macgilchrist, F. (Eds). (2023). Die datafizierte Schule (1. Auflage 2023). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38651-1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  245. boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for Big Data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), Article 5. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  246. Breidenstein, G., Hirschauer, S., Kalthoff, H., & Nieswand, B. (2020). Ethnografie: Die Praxis der Feldforschung (3., überarbeitete Auflage). UVK Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  247. Breiter, A., & Bock, A. (2023). Datafizierte Gesellschaft | Bildung | Schule. In A. Bock, A. Breiter, S. Hartong, J. Jarke, S. Jornitz, A. Lange, & F. Macgilchrist (Eds), Die datafizierte Schule (pp. 1–35). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38651-1_1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  248. Breiter, A., & Hepp, A. (2018). The complexity of datafication: Putting digital traces in context. In A. Hepp, A. Breiter, & U. Hasebrink (Hrsg.), Communicative Figurations (pp. 387–405). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65584-0_16 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  249. Carrozza, Tiago Santos, & Pereira. Chiarra (2016). Mapping digital methods: Where science and technology studies and communication studies meet? In A. Gradim & C. Moura (Hrsg.), Communicating and Evaluating Science (pp. 203–236). Beira Interior University. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  250. Charles, V., & Gherman, T. (2019). Big data analytics and ethnography: Together for the greater good. In A. Emrouznejad & V. Charles (Eds), Big Data for the greater good (Vol. 42, pp. 19–33). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93061-9_2 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  251. Couldry, N. (2017). The Myth of Big Data. In M. T. Schäfer & K. van Es (Eds), The datafied society: Studying culture through data (pp. 235–239). Amsterdam University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  252. Crawford, K., Gray, M. L., & Miltner, K. (2014). Big data| Critiquing big data: Politics, ethics, epistemology | Special Section Introduction. International Journal of Communication, 8(0), Article 0. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2167 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  253. Dander, V., Bettinger, P., Ferraro, E., Leineweber, C., & Rummler, K. (Eds). (2020). Digitalisierung – Subjekt – Bildung: Kritische Betrachtungen der digitalen Transformation (1st edn). Verlag Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvvb7n3h Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  254. Decuypere, M. (2021). The Topologies of Data Practices: A Methodological Introduction. Journal of New Approaches in Educational Research, 10(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.7821/naer.2021.1.650 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  255. Decuypere, M., Grimaldi, E., & Landri, P. (2021). Introduction: Critical studies of digital education platforms. Critical Studies in Education, 62(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2020.1866050 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  256. Dieter, M., Gerlitz, C., Helmond, A., Tkacz, N., van der Vlist, F. N., & Weltevrede, E. (2019). Multi-Situated App Studies: Methods and Propositions. Social Media + Society, 5(2), 2056305119846486. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305119846486 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  257. Eleftheriou, I., Embury, S. M., Moden, R., Dobinson, P., & Brass, A. (2018). Data journeys: Identifying social and technical barriers to data movement in large, complex organisations. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 78, 102–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbi.2017.12.001 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  258. Esposito, E. (2024). Kommunikation mit unverständlichen Maschinen. Residenz Verlag. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  259. Eubanks, V. (2019). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor (First Picador edition). Picador St. Martin’s Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  260. Franken, L. (2022). Digitale Daten und Methoden als Erweiterung qualitativer Forschungsprozesse. Herausforderungen und Potenziale aus den Digital Humanities und Computational Social Sciences. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 23(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-22.2.3818 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  261. Gentzel, P. (2017). Praktisches Wissen und Materialität. Herausforderungen für kritisch- konstruktivistische Kommunikations- und Medienforschung. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 65(2), 275–293. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2017-2-275 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  262. Gerlitz, C. (2017). Data point critique. In M. T. Schäfer & K. van Es (Eds), The datafied society: Studying culture through data (pp. 241–244). Amsterdam University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  263. Hepp, A., Jarke, J., & Kramp, L. (Eds). (2022). New Perspectives in Critical Data Studies: The ambivalences of data power. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96180-0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  264. Hillman, V. (2023). Bringing in the technological, ethical, educational and social-structural for a new education data governance. Learning, Media and Technology, 48(1), 122–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2022.2052313 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  265. Hintz, A., Dencik, L., & Wahl-Jørgensen, K. (2019). Digital citizenship in a datafied society. Polity Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  266. Hirschauer, S. (2014). Un/doing Differences. Die Kontingenz sozialer Zugehörigkeiten. Zeitschrift für Soziologie, 43(3), 170–191. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  267. Houben, D., & Prietel, B. (2018). Datengesellschaft: Einsichten in die Datafizierung des Sozialen. Transcript. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  268. Jarke, J., Hartong, S., Raabe, T., Dabisch, V., Breiter, A., Lange, A., & Zakharova, I. (2023). Zur Erfassung und Modellierung der „Hinterbühne“ von Datenflüssen: Das Beispiel Unterrichtsausfall. In A. Bock, A. Breiter, S. Hartong, J. Jarke, S. Jornitz, A. Lange, & F. Macgilchrist (Eds), Die datafizierte Schule (pp. 61–91). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-38651-1_3 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  269. Katzenbach, C. (2022). Der „Algorithmic turn“ in der Plattform-Governance. KZfSS Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 74(S1), 283–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11577-022-00837-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  270. Keller, T. R., & Klinger, U. (2019). Social Bots in Election Campaigns: Theoretical, Empirical, and Methodological Implications. Political Communication, 36(1), 171–189. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2018.1526238 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  271. Kennedy, H. (2018). Living with data: Aligning data studies and data activism through a focus on everyday experiences of datafication. Krisis 1, 18–30. https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/id/eprint/129959/2/Krisis-2018-1-Helen-Kennedy-Living-with-Data-Aligning-Data-Studies-and-Data-Activism-Through-a-Focus-on-Everyday-Experiences-of-Datafication.pdf-18-30.pdf [30.01.2026]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  272. Kitchin, R. (2014). The data revolution: Big data, open data, data infrastructures & their consequences. Sage Publications. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  273. Knox, H., & Nafus, D. (2018). Ethnography for a data-saturated world. Manchester university press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  274. Law, J. (2021). From after method to care-ful research (a foreword). In C. Addey & N. Piattoeva (Eds.), Intimate accounts of education policy research (pp. xvi–xx). Routledge. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  275. Law, J., & Lin, W. (2020). Care-ful Research: Sensibilities from STS. 17. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  276. Lengersdorf & M. Wieser (Hrsg.), Schlüsselwerke der Science & Technology Studies (S. 123-132). Wiesbaden: VS. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  277. Light, B., Burgess, J., & Duguay, S. (2018). The walkthrough method: An approach to the study of apps. New Media & Society, 20(3), 881–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816675438 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  278. Lippert, I., & Mewes, J. S. (2021). Data, methods and writing: Methodographies of STS ethnographic collaboration in practice. Science & Technology Studies, 34(3), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.110597 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  279. Livingston, S. (2018). Audiences in an age of datafication: Critical questions for media research. Television and New Media. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  280. Mahrt, M. (2019). Beyond filter bubbles and echo chambers: The integrative potential of the Internet. ifpuk – Institute for Media and Communication Studies at FU Berlin. (Digital Communication Research; 1). https://doi.org/10.17174/DCR.V5.0 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  281. Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big data: A revolution that will transform how we live, work and think. Murray. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  282. Mol, A. (2002). The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. Duke University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1220nc1 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  283. Parsons, K. M. (Ed.). (2003). The science wars: Debating scientific knowledge and technology. Prometheus Books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  284. Pentzold, C., Brantner, C., & Fölsche, L. (2019). Imagining big data: Illustrations of „big data” in US news articles, 2010–2016. New Media & Society, 21(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818791326 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  285. Peters, U., & Chin-Yee, B. (2025). Generalization bias in large language model summarization of scientific research. Royal Society Open Science, 12(4), 241776. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.241776 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  286. Pink, S., Berg, M., Lupton, D., & Ruckenstein, M. (2022). Everyday automation: Experiencing and anticipating Emerging Technologies (1st edn). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003170884 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  287. Pink, S., Ruckenstein, M., Willim, R., & Duque, M. (2018). Broken data: Conceptualising data in an emerging world. Big Data & Society, 5(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717753228 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  288. Pütz, O., & Esposito, E. (2024). Performance without understanding: How ChatGPT relies on humans to repair conversational trouble. Discourse & Communication, 18(6), 859–868. https://doi.org/10.1177/17504813241271492 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  289. Quinlan, E. (2008). Conspicuous invisibility: Shadowing as a data collection strategy. Qualitative Inquiry, 14(8), 1480–1499. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800408318318 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  290. Rogers, R. (2017). Foundations of digital methods. Query design. In M. T. Schäfer & K. van Es (Eds), The datafied society: Studying culture through data (pp. 75–94). Amsterdam University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  291. Sahin, A. (2025, March 5). What is Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) in LLM and How it works? Medium. https://medium.com/@sahin.samia/what-is-retrieval-augmented-generation-rag-in-llm-and-how-it-works-a8c79e35a172 [27.01.2025]. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  292. Schäfer, M. S., & Wessler, H. (2020). Öffentliche Kommunikation in Zeiten künstlicher Intelligenz. Publizistik, 65(3), 307–331. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11616-020-00592-6 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  293. Schäfer, M. T., & van Es, K. (Eds). (2017). The datafied society: Studying culture through data. Amsterdam University Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  294. Schneider, T., Fuchs, K., & Mayer, S. (2021). Science and Technology Studies: Die Datafizierung von Alltagspraktiken: Datenaktivismus als neue Verantwortung? In A. Henkel (Ed.), 10 Minuten Soziologie: Verantwortung (pp. 183–196). transcript Verlag. https://doi.org/10.14361/9783839451120-012 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  295. Sismondo, S. (2010). An introduction to science and technology studies (Second edition). Wiley-Blackwell. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  296. Stehle, H., Bock, A., Wilhelm, C., Springer, N., Mahrt, M., Lobinger, K., Linke, C., Engelmann, I., Detel, H., & Brantner, C. (2024). In/Visibility in the digital age: A literature review from a communication studies perspective. International Journal of Communication, 18(0), 5471–5493. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  297. Stier, S., Breuer, J., Siegers, P., & Thorson, K. (2020). Integrating survey data and digital trace data: Key issues in developing an emerging field. Social Science Computer Review, 38(5), 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319843669 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  298. Troeger, J., & Bock, A. (2022). The sociotechnical walkthrough – a methodological approach for platform studies. Studies in Communication Sciences, 22(1), 43–52. https://doi.org/10.24434/j.scoms.2022.01.3064 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  299. van Dijck, J. (2014). Datafication, dataism and dataveillance: Big Data between scientific paradigm and ideology. Surveillance & Society, 12(2), 197–208. https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v12i2.4776 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  300. van Es, K., & de Lange, M. (2020). Data with its boots on the ground: Datawalking as research method. European Journal of Communication, 35(3), 278–289. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323120922087 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  301. van Es, K., Schäfer, M. T., & Wieringa, M. (2021). Tool criticism and the computational turn. A „Methodological moment” in Media and Communication Studies. M&K Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 69(1), 46–64. https://doi.org/10.5771/1615-634X-2021-1-46 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  302. von Scherenberg, F., Hellmeier, M., & Otto, B. (2024). Data sovereignty in information systems. Electronic Markets, 34(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00693-4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  303. Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion: Rethinking the digital divide. MIT Press. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  304. Wiedemann, G. (2013). Opening up to Big Data: Computer-assisted analysis of textual data in social sciences. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 14(2). Art. 23. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-14.2.1949 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  305. Williamson, B. (2016). Digital education governance: Data visualization, predictive analytics, and ‘real-time’ policy instruments. Journal of Education Policy, 31(2), 123–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2015.1035758 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  306. Wollin-Giering, S., Hoffmann, M., Höfting, J., & Ventzke, C. (2024). Automatic transcription of English and German Qualitative Interviews. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 25(1) Art. 8. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-25.1.4129 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  307. Zakharova, I. (2022). Understanding data studies—A methodological and conceptual inquiry into research on datafication [Universität Bremen]. https://doi.org/10.26092/ELIB/1675 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  308. Zakharova, I., & Bock, A. (2023). Researching in/visibilities and data practices in education. On_education. Journal for Research and Debate, 6(18). https://doi.org/10.17899/on_ed.2023.18.4 Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88
  309. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. Profile books. Open Google Scholar DOI: 10.5771/1615-634X-2026-1-88

Citation


Download RIS Download BibTex