The Value of Big Data in Digital Media Research

Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media

Volumn 57, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 20-33

  Mahrt, Merja ^a   Scharkow, Michael ^b  

^a HEINRICH HEINE UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HOHENHEIM   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875150977     PISSN: 08838151     EISSN: 15506878     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08838151.2012.761700     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Anderson, C. 2008, June 23. The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired, Retrieved fromhttp://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory/
2. Bailenson, J. N. Contribution to the ICA Phoenix closing plenary: "The Internet is the end of communication theory as we know it.". 62nd annual convention of the International Communication Association. Phoenix, AZ. Retrieved fromhttp://www.icahdq.org/conf/2012/closing.asp
3. Barnes, S. 2006. A privacy paradox: Social networking in the United States. First Monday, 11(9) Retrieved fromhttp://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1394/1312
4. Batinic, B., Reips, U.-D. and Bosnjak, M. 2002. Online social sciences. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
5. Bollier, D. 2010. The promise and peril of Big Data. Washington, DC: Aspen Institue. Retrieved November 30, 2012, fromhttp://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/pubs/The_Promise_and_Peril_of_Big_Data.pdf
6. Boyd, D. and Crawford, K. 2012. Critical questions for Big Data. Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5): 662-679. doi: 10.1080/1369118x.2012.678878
7. Busemann, K. and Gscheidle, C. 2012. Web 2.0: Habitualisierung der Social Communitys [Web 2.0: Habitualization of social community use]. Media Perspektiven,: 380-390. (7-8)
8. Chew, C. and Eysenbach, G. 2010. Pandemics in the age of Twitter: Content analysis of tweets during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak. PLoS ONE, 5(11): e14118 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0014118
9. Christians, C. G. and Chen, S.-L. S. 2004. "Introduction: Technological environments and the evolution of social research methods.". In Online social research. Methods, issues, & ethics Edited by: Johns, M. D., Chen, S.-L. S. and Hall, G. J. 15-23. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
10. Dodge, M. 2005. "The role of maps in virtual research methods.". In Virtual methods. Issues in social research on the Internet Edited by: Hine, C. 113-127. Oxford, UK: Berg.
11. Engesser, S. and Krämer, B. 2011. "Die Rückfangmethode. Ein Verfahren zur Ermittlung unzugänglicher Grundgesamtheiten in der Journalismusforschung [Capture-recapture. A method to determine hard-to-reach populations in journalism research].". In Methoden der Journalismusforschung Edited by: Jandura, O., Quandt, T. and Vogelgesang, J. 171-187. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.
12. Erlhofer, S. 2010. "Datenerhebung in der Blogosphäre: Herausforderungen und Lösungswege [Data gathering in the blogosphere: Challenges and solutions].". In Die Online-Inhaltsanalyse Edited by: Welker, M. and Wünsch, C. 144-166. Cologne, Germany: Halem.
13. Gerring, J. 2001. Social science methodology: A criterial framework. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
14. Granger, C. W. J. 1986. Developments in the study of cointegrated economic variables. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 48(3): 213-228. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0084.1986.mp48003002.x
15. Herring, S. C. 2010. "Web content analysis: Expanding the paradigm.". In International handbook of Internet research Edited by: Hunsinger, J., Klastrup, L. and Allen, M. 233-249. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
16. Hooper, C. S. 2011. Qualitative in context. Journal of Advertising Research, 51: 163-166.
17. Jankowski, N. W. and van Selm, M. 2005. "Epilogue: Methodological concerns and innovations in Internet research.". In Virtual methods. Issues in social research on the Internet Edited by: Hine, C. 199-207. Oxford, UK: Berg.
18. Johns, M. D., Chen, S.-L. S. and Hall, G. J. 2004. Online social research: Methods, issues, & ethics. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
19. Jones, S. 1999a. Doing Internet research. Critical issues and methods for examining the Net. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
20. Jones, S. 1999b. "Studying the Net. Intricacies and issues.". In Doing Internet research. Critical issues and methods for examining the Net Edited by: Jones, S. 1-27. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21. Kearon, J. and Harrison, P. 2011. Research robots. A dramatic new way to conduct research & generate insights Retrieved November 30, 2012, fromhttp://www.brainjuicer.com/xtra/BrainJuicer_DigiViduals_Research_Robots_Paper.pdf
22. King, G. and Lowe, W. 2003. An automated information extraction tool for international conflict data with performance as good as human coders: A rare events evaluation design. International Organization, 57(03): 617-642. doi: 10.1017/S0020818303573064
23. Krippendorff, K. 2004. Content analysis. An introduction to its methodology, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
24. Lally, E. 2009. "Response to Annette Markham.". In Internet inquiry. Conversations about method Edited by: Markham, A. N. and Baym, N. K. 156-164. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
25. Lazer, D., Pentland, A., Adamic, L., Aral, S., Barabási, A.-L., Brewer, D. and van Alstyne, M. 2009. Computational social science. Science, 323(5915): 721-723. doi: 10.1126/science.1167742
26. Manovich, L. 2012. "Trending: The promises and the challenges of big social data.". In Debates in the digital humanites Edited by: Gold, M. K. 460-475. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
27. Markham, A. and Buchanan, E. 2012. Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Version 2.0. Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee Retrieved fromhttp://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf
28. Mazur, E. 2010. "Collecting data from social networking Web sites and blogs.". In Advanced methods for conducting online behavioral research Edited by: Gosling, S. D. and Johnson, J. A. 77-90. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
29. McMillan, S. J. 2000. The microscope and the moving target: The challenge of applying content analysis to the World Wide Web. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(1): 80-98.
30. Mehl, M. R. and Gill, A. J. 2010. "Automatic text analysis.". In Advanced methods for conducting online behavioral research Edited by: Gosling, S. D. and Johnson, J. A. 109-127. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
31. Mitra, A. and Cohen, E. 1999. "Analyzing the Web. Directions and challenges.". In Doing Internet research. Critical issues and methods for examining the Net Edited by: Jones, S. 179-202. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
32. Murthy, D. 2008. Digital ethnography. An examination of the use of new technologies for social research. Sociology, 42(5): 837-855. doi: 10.1177/0038038508094565
33. Narayanan, A. and Shmatikov, V. Robust de-anonymization of large sparse datasets. Paper presented at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. 2008. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cs.utexas.edu/~shmat/shmat_oak08netflix.pdf
34. Nunnally, J. C. 1978. Psychometric theory, 2nd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
35. Orgad, S. 2009. "How can researchers make sense of the issues involved in collecting and interpreting online and offline data?.". In Internet inquiry. Conversations about method Edited by: Markham, A. N. and Baym, N. K. 33-53. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
36. Park, H. W. and Thelwall, M. 2005. "The network approach to Web hyperlink research and its utility for science communication.". In Virtual methods. Issues in social research on the Internet Edited by: Hine, C. 171-181. Oxford, UK: Berg.
37. Parker, C., Saundage, D. and Lee, C. Y. Can qualitative content analysis be adapted for use by social informaticians to study social media discourse? A position paper. Paper presented at the ACIS 2011: Proceedings of the 22nd Australasian Conference on Information Systems: Identifying the Information Systems Discipline. Sydney, Australia. Retrieved fromhttp://dro.deakin.edu.au/eserv/DU:30041098/parker-canqualitative-2011.pdf
38. Romero, D. M., Meeder, B. and Kleinberg, J. Differences in the mechanics of information diffusion across topics: Idioms, political hashtags, and complex contagion on Twitter. Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World Wide Web, WWW'11. pp.695-704. New York, NY: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1963405.1963503
39. Russell, M. A. 2011. Mining the social Web. Analyzing data from Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and other social media sites. Beijing, China: O'Reilly.
40. Russom, P. 2011. Big data analytics Retrieved November 30, 2012, fromhttp://www.cloudtalk.it/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/1_17959_TDWIBigDataAnalytics.pdf
41. Savage, M. and Burrows, R. 2007. The coming crisis of empirical sociology. Sociology, 41(5): 885-899. doi: 10.1177/0038038507080443
42. Scharkow, M. 2013. Thematic content analysis using supervised machine learning. An empirical evaluation using German online news. Quality & Quantity, 47(2): 761-773. doi: 10.1007/s11135-011-9545-7
43. Scharkow, M. and Vogelgesang, J. 2011. Measuring the public agenda using search engine queries. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 23(1): 104-113. doi: 10.1093/ijpor/edq048
44. Schrodt, P. A. Automated production of high-volume, near-real-time political event data. Paper presented at the 2010 American Political Science Association meeting. Washington, DC. Retrieved fromhttp://polmeth.wustl.edu/media/Paper/SchrodtEventDataAPSA10.pdf
45. Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., Cai, D. and Kappas, A. 2010. Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(12): 2544-2558. doi: 10.1002/asi.21416
46. Utz, S. 2010. "Using automated "field notes" to observe the behavior of online subjects.". In Advanced methods for conducting online behavioral research Edited by: Gosling, S. D. and Johnson, J. A. 91-108. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
47. Vogt, W. P., Gardner, D. C. and Haeffele, L. M. 2012. When to use what research design. New York, NY: Guilford.
48. Welker, M., Wünsch, C., Böcking, S., Bock, A., Friedemann, A., Herbers, M. and Schweitzer, E. J. 2010. "Die Online-Inhaltsanalyse: methodische Herausforderung, aber ohne Alternative [Online content analysis: Methodological challenge, but without alternative].". In Die Online-Inhaltsanalyse Edited by: Welker, M. and Wünsch, C. 9-30. Cologne, Germany: Halem.
49. Xifra, J. and Grau, F. 2010. Nanoblogging PR: The discourse on public relations in Twitter. Public Relations Review, 36(2): 171-174. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2010.02.005
50. Yanovitzky, I. and Greene, K. 2009. "Quantitative methods and causal inference in media effects research.". In The Sage handbook of media processes and effects Edited by: Nabi, R. L. and Oliver, M. B. 35-52. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
51. Zheleva, E. and Getoor, L. To join or not to join: The illusion of privacy in social networks with mixed public and private user profiles. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World Wide Web, WWW'09. pp.531-540. New York, NY: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1526709.1526781
52. Zimmer, M. 2010. "But the data is already public": On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(4): 313-325. doi: 10.1007/s10676-010-9227-5