Using APIs for Data Collection on Social Media

Information Society

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 256-265

  Lomborg, Stine ^a   Bechmann, Anja ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

^b AARHUS UNIVERSITY   (Denmark)

Author keywords

APIs; data collection; data quality; methodology; research ethics; social media

Indexed keywords

EID: 84904197321     PISSN: 01972243     EISSN: 10876537     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01972243.2014.915276     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Ausserhofer, J., and A. Maireder. 2013. National politics on Twitter. Information, Communication & Society 16(3): 291-314.
2. Backstrom, L., P. Boldi, M. Rosa, J. Ugander, and S. Vigna. 2011. Four degrees of separation. http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.4570 (accessed April 10, 2013).
3. Bakshy, E., I. Rosenn, C. Marlow, C. Rosenn, and L. Adamic. 2012. The role of social networks in information diffusion. In WWW '12 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, 519-28. New York, NY: ACM
4. Baron, N. 2008. Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
5. Bechmann, A. 2014a. Managing the interoperable self. In The ubiquitous Internet, ed. A. Bechmann and S. Lombord. New York, NY: Routledge, in press.
6. Bechmann, A. 2014b. Non-informed consent cultures: Privacy policies and app contracts on Facebook. Journal of Media Business Studies 11(1): 21-38.
7. Bechmann, A., and S. Lomborg. 2012. Mapping actor roles in social media: Different perspectives on value creation in theories of user participation. New Media & Society 15(5): 765-81 (online first, doi:10.1177/1461444812462853).
8. Bernstein, M., E. Bakshy, M. Burke, and B. Karrer. 2013. Quantifying the invisible audience in social networks. Paper presented at the CHI: ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Paris, France, April-May.
9. Berry, D.M. 2011. The computational turn. Thinking about the digital humanities. Culture Machine 12. http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/440/470 (accessed April 3, 2014).
10. Black, A., C. Mascaro, M. Gallagher, and S.P. Goggins. 2012. Twitter Zombie: Architecture for capturing, socially transforming and analyzing the twittersphere. In GROUP'12: Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Supporting group work, 229-38. New York, NY: ACM.
11. Boyd, D., and K. Crawford. 2012. Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society 15(5): 662-79.
12. Brügger, N. 2011. Web archiving: Between past, present, and future. In The Blackwell handbook of Internet studies, ed. M. Consalvo and C.M. Ess, 24-42. Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
13. Bruns, A., and J. Burgess. 2012. Researching news discussion on Twitter: New methodologies. Journalism Studies 13(5-6): 801-14 (online first: doi:10.1080/1461670X.2012.664428).
14. Bruns, A., and Y.E. Liang. 2012. Tools and methods for capturing Twitter data during natural disasters. First Monday 17(4),. online. http://firstmonday.org/article/view/3937/3193 (accessed April 3, 2014).
15. Bollier, D. 2010. The promise and peril of big data. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute. http://www.thinkbiganalytics.com/uploads/Aspen-Big_Data.pdf (accessed March 1, 2012).
16. Courtois, C., P. Mechant, and L. Marez. 2011. Teenage uploaders on YouTube: Networked public expectancies, online feedback preference, and received on-platform feedback. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 14(5): 315-22.
17. De Smedt, T., and W. Daelemans. 2012. Pattern for Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 13(1): 2063-67.
18. Ess, C.M. 2009. Digital media ethics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
19. Ess, C.M., and AoIR Ethics Working Committee. 2002. Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee. http://www.aoir.org/reports/ethics.pdf (accessed June 9, 2012).
20. European Union [the European Parliament and the Council]. 1995. Directive 95/46/EC on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data. Off. J. L 281(23/11/1995): 31-50.
21. Fuchs, C., K. Boersma, A. Albrechtslund, and M. Sandoval (Eds.). 2012. Internet and Surveillance: The Challenges of Web 2.0 and Social Media. New York: Routledge.
22. Gawk. 2011. http://www.gnu.org/software/gawk (accessed March 3, 2014).
23. Gephi. 2011. http://gephi.org (accessed March 3, 2014).
24. Giglietto, F., L. Rossi, and D. Bennato 2012. The open laboratory: Limits and possibilities of using Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube as a research data source. Journal of Technology in Human Services 30(3-4): 145-59.
25. González-Bailón, S., N. Wang, A. Rivero, J. Borge-Holthoefer, and Y. Moreno. 2012. Assessing the bias in communication networks sampled from Twitter. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2185134 (accessed April 3, 2014).
26. Hansen, D.L., B. Shneiderman, and M.A. Smith 2011. Analyzing social media with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world. Burlington, MA: Elsevier.
27. Herring, S.C. 2010. Web content analysis: Expanding the paradigm. In The International handbook of Internet research, ed. J. Hunsinger, M. Allen, and L. Klastrup, 233-50. Berlin, Germany: Springer Verlag.
28. Honeycutt, C., and Herring, S.C. 2009. Beyond microblogging: Conversation and collaboration via Twitter. In Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42), 1-10. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.
29. Horan, T.J. 2012. 'Soft' versus 'hard' news on microblogging networks. Information, Communication & Society 16(1): 43-60 (online first: doi:10.1080/1369118X.2011.649774).
30. Huberman, B.A., D. Romero, and F. Wu. 2009. Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday 14(1),. online. http://firstmonday.org/article/view/2317/2063 (accessed on April 3, 2014).
31. Java, A., X. Song, T. Finin, and B. Tseng. 2007. Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. In Proceedings of the Joint 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop 2007, 56-65. New York, NY: ACM Press.
32. Karpf, D. 2012. Social science research methods in Internet time. Information, Communication & Society 15(5): 639-61.
33. Kramer, A.D. I. 2012. The spread of emotion via Facebook. In CHI '12: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 767-70. New York, NY: ACM.
34. Kwak, H., C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon. 2010. What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? In WWW '10: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, 591-600. New York, NY: ACM.
35. Leskovec, J., and E. Horwitz. 2007. Planetary-scale views on an instant-messaging network. Microsoft Research technical report (Microsoft Research technical report MSR-TR-2006-186). http://research.microsoft.com/pubs/70389/tr-2006-186.pdf (accessed April 3, 2014).
36. Lomborg, S. 2011. Social media. A genre perspective. doctoral dissertation, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
37. Lomborg, S. 2012. Researching communicative practice: Web archiving in qualitative social media research. Journal of Technology in Human Services 30(3-4): 219-31.
38. Lomborg, S. 2013. Personal Internet archives and ethics. Research Ethics 9(1): 20-31.
39. Lotan, G., E. Graeff, M. Ananny, D. Gaffney, I. Pearce, and D. Boyd. 2011. The revolutions were tweeted: Information flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. International Journal of Communications 5: 1375-405.
40. Mahrt, M., and M. Scharkow 2013. The value of big data in digital media research, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 57(1): 20-33.
41. Markham, A. 2012. Moving into the flow: Using a network perspective to explore complexity in Internet contexts. In Network analysis: Methodological challenges, ed. S. Lomborg, 45-58 (. CFI Monograph Series, vol. 14). Aarhus, Denmark: Center for Internet Studies, Aarhus University.
42. Markham, A.N., and E.A. Buchanan. 2012. Ethical decision-making and Internet research: Recommendations from the AoIR Ethics Working Committee (Version 2.0). http://aoir.org/reports/ethics2.pdf (accessed April 3, 2014).
43. McChesney, R. 2007. Communication revolution: Critical junctures and the future of media. New York, NY: New Press.
44. Morstatter, F., J. Pfeffer, H. Liu, and K.M. Carley. 2013. Is the sample good enough? Comparing data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM 2013), Boston, MA, July.
45. Naaman, M., J. Boase, and C.-H. Lai. 2010. Is it really about me? Message content in social awareness streams. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW-2010), 189-92. New York, NY: ACM
46. Neuhaus, F., and T. Webmoor. 2012 Agile ethics for massified research and visualization. Information, Communication & Society 15(1): 43-65.
47. Ohm, P. 2010. Broken promises of privacy: Responding to the surprising failure of anonymization, UCLA Law Review 57: 1701-77.
48. OpenRefine. 2012. http://openrefine.org (accessed March 3, 2014).
49. Reips, U.-D., and P. Garaizar. 2011. Mining Twitter: Microblogging as a source for psychological wisdom of the crowds. Behavior Research Methods 43: 635-42.
50. Rogers, R. 2012. Digital methods. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
51. Serrano, A. 2011. The social media explosion: By the numbers. Fiscal Times,. September 12. http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2011/09/12/The-Social-Media-Explosion-By-the-Numbers.aspx#page1 (accessed July 6, 2012).
52. Smith, M.A., B. Schneiderman, N. Milic-Frayling, E.M. Rodrigues, V. Barash, C. Dunne, T. Capone, A. Perer, and E. Gleave. 2009. Analyzing (social media) networks with NodeXL. C&T '09: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on communities and technologies, 255-64. New York, NY: ACM
53. Stutzman, F., R. Gross, and A. Acquisti. 2012. Silent listeners: The evolution of privacy and disclosure on Facebook. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality 4(2): 7-41.
54. Vicente, C.R., I. Assent, and C.S. Jensen. 2011. effective privacy-preserving online route planning. In 12th IEEE International Conference on Mobile Data Management (MDM), 119-28. Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society Press.
55. Weller, K., and C. Puschmann. 2011. Twitter for scientific communication: How can citations/references be identified and measured? In Proceedings of the ACM Web Science Conference (WebSci '11), 1-4. http://journal.webscience.org/500 (accessed April 3, 2014).
56. Wu, S., W.A. Mason, J.M. Hofman, and D.J. Watts. 2011. Who says what to whom on Twitter. In WWW '11: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on the World Wide Web, 705-14. New York, NY: ACM.
57. Yahoo! Pipes. 2007. http://pipes.yahoo.com/pipes (accessed March 3, 2014).
58. YourTwapperKeeper. 2011. https://github.com/540co/yourTwapperKeeper (accessed March 3, 2014).
59. van Dijck, J. 2009. Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content. Media, Culture & Society 31(1): 41-58.
60. Zimmer, M. 2010. "But the data is already public": On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics & Information Technology 12(4): 313-25.