1. Формирование Интернет-поведения в политических системах различного типа Бродовская Елена Викторовна, д-р полит. наук, зав. лаб. социального компьютинга Домбровская Анна Юрьевна, канд. социол. наук, ст. науч. сотр. лаборатории социального компьютинга Лаборатория социального компьютинга Института перспективных исследований Московского педагогического государственного университета

2. Эмпирическая модель исследования Установление взаимосвязи развития политических систем и Интернет-коммуникации Сравнительный анализ Интернет- коммуникации Типологический анализ политических систем Кластерный анализ Интернет- аудитории

3. Sample To collect data used mass pool of Russians (N=1600, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), mass pool of citizens of China (1500 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), Sweden (2700 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), UK (2057 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), Mexico (2000 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), South Africa (1589 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age), USA (1351 respondents, sample is representative for the type area of ​​ residence, district, gender and age). To verify the received data we clustered the selection of World Internet Project in selected country with SPSS for Windows 18.0.

4. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human digital 9,4 14,618,15,912,83,46,323,912,313,73,66,68,2 Human entertaining 17,7 13,517,333,48,841,88,07,018,230,215,09,110,5 Human pragmatic 19,1 27,33,54,449,51,94,940,218,13,812,039,823,3 Human traditional 18,6 21,75,323,916,417,714,914,613,010,632,329,622,5 Human non-digital 33,9 22,855,732,412,535,465,914,338,441,837,014,835,5 Total100 00100

5. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human digital 9,4 14,618,15,912,83,46,323,912,313,73,66,68,2

6. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human entertaining 17,7 13,517,333,48,841,88,07,018,230,215,09,110,5

7. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human pragmatic 19,1 27,33,54,449,51,94,940,218,13,812,039,823,3

8. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human traditional 18,6 21,75,323,916,417,714,914,613,010,632,329,622,5

9. Clusters of Internet users, % UKChRFRFSw.Mex.SASAUSCyp Gr.Cyp. TurkTaiwSwitzPol. Human non-digital 33,9 22,855,732,412,535,465,914,338,441,837,014,835,5

10. Indexes Integrated indicatorUSARussiaMexicoChinaUKSwedenSouth Africa The Web Index (2012)2 place in the rating; I=97,31 31 place in the rating; I =47,29 22 place in the rating; I=57,68 29 place in the rating; I =51,72 3 place in the rating; I =93,83 1 place in the rating; I =100 36 place in the rating; I =44,49 Freedom on the Net (2013)Free InternetPartially free Internet Not free InternetFree InternetNo dataFree Internet The United Nations E- Government Survey (2014) 7 place in the rating; I = 0.8748 27 place in the rating; I = 0.7296 63 place in the rating; I = 0.5733 70 place in the rating; I = 0.5450 8 place in the rating; I = 0.8695 14 place in the rating; I = 0.8225 93 place in the rating; I = 0.4869 ICT Development Index (2013)17 place in the rating; I= 7,53 40 place in the rating; I = 6,19 83 place in the rating; I = 3,95 78 place in the rating; I = 4,18 8 place in the rating; I = 7,98 2 place in the rating; I= 8,45 84 place in the rating; I = 3,95 Networked Readiness Index (2014) 7 place in the rating; I = 5.61 50 place in the rating; I = 4.30 79- place in the rating; I = 3.89 62- place in the rating; I = 4.05 9 place in the rating; I = 5.54 3 place in the rating; I = 5.93 70 place in the rating; I = 3.98

11. Typological analysis Cases: USA, the Russian Federation, Mexico, China, Great Britain, Sweden, South Africa Open political systems /democratic political regimes Partially open political systems / hybrid political regimes The closed political systems / authoritarian political regimes Lack of the institutionalized control over Internet communication from the state +/+ USA UK Sweden +/+ South Africa - Existence of the restrictions of Internet communication set by the state --+/+ China Partial control from the state / other actors behind some aspects of Internet communication -+/+ Russia, Mexico - High level of penetration of the Internet+/+ USA UK Sweden -- Medium level of penetration of the Internet -+/+ Russia, Mexico, South Africa - Low level of penetration of the Internet--+/+ China Essential specific weight of a cluster of the users who aren't limiting Internet communication scale with content type +/+ USA -+/+ China Essential specific weight of a cluster of the users limiting Internet communication scale with the pragmatic purposes +/+ UK Sweden __ Essential specific weight of a cluster of the users limiting Internet communication scale with leisure content -+/+ Russia, Mexico, South Africa -

12. Support. Research was financed by the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation within realization of the state task "Detection of regularities of interrelation of development of political systems and Internet communication" for 2014-2016. Code state blow 2816.

13. Thank you for your attention!