Twitter in academic conferences: Usage, networking and participation over time

HT 2014 - Proceedings of the 25th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media

Volumn , Issue , 2014, Pages 285-290

  Wen, Xidao ^a   Lin, Yu Ru ^a   Trattner, Christoph ^b   Parra, Denis ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b KNOW CENTER   (Austria)

^c PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

Author keywords

academic conferences; interactions; retention; twitter; usage

Indexed keywords

BEAM PLASMA INTERACTIONS; HYPERTEXT SYSTEMS; INFORMATION USE;

ACADEMIC CONFERENCES; BACK CHANNELS; CLASSIFICATION TASKS; INTERACTION NETWORKS; RESEARCH COMMUNITIES; RETENTION; TWITTER; USAGE;

SOCIAL NETWORKING (ONLINE);

EID: 84907382322     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2631775.2631826     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (25)

1. F. Abel, C. Hauff, G.-J. Houben, R. Stronkman, and K. Tao. Twitcident: fighting fire with information from social web streams. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference companion on World Wide Web, pages 305-308. ACM, 2012.
2. P. Bonacich. Factoring and weighting approaches to status scores and clique identification. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 2(1):113-120, 1972.
3. D. Boyd, S. Golder, and G. Lotan. Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. In System Sciences (HICSS), 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on, pages 1-10. IEEE, 2010.
4. T. Desai, A. Shariff, A. Shariff, M. Kats, X. Fang, C. Christiano, and M. Ferris. Tweeting the meeting: an in-depth analysis of twitter activity at kidney week 2011. PloS one, 7(7):e40253, 2012.
5. M. Ebner. Introducing live microblogging: How single presentations can be enhanced by the mass. Journal of research in innovative teaching, 2(1), 2009.
6. M. Hall, E. Frank, G. Holmes, B. Pfahringer, P. Reutemann, and I. H. Witten. The weka data mining software: An update. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl., 11(1):10-18, Nov. 2009.
7. H. He and E. A. Garcia. Learning from imbalanced data. IEEE Trans. on Knowl. and Data Eng., 21(9):1263-1284, Sept. 2009.
8. J. M. Kleinberg. Authoritative sources in a hyperlinked environment. JOURNAL OF THE ACM, 46(5):604-632, 1999.
9. J. Lanagan and A. F. Smeaton. Using twitter to detect and tag important events in live sports. Artificial Intelligence, pages 542-545, 2011.
10. A. O. Larsson and H. Moe. Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 swedish election campaign. New Media & Society, 14(5):729-747, 2012.
11. J. Letierce, A. Passant, J. Breslin, and S. Decker. Understanding how twitter is used to spread scientific messages. 2010.
12. J. Letierce, A. Passant, J. G. Breslin, and S. Decker. Using twitter during an academic conference: The# iswc2009 use-case. In ICWSM, 2010.
13. Y.-R. Lin, B. Keegan, D. Margolin, and D. Lazer. Rising tides or rising stars?: Dynamics of shared attention on twitter during media events. CoRR, abs/1307.2785, 2013.
14. Y. Liu, C. Kliman-Silver, and A. Mislove. The tweets they are a-changin': Evolution of twitter users and behavior. 2014.
15. M. Mendoza, B. Poblete, and C. Castillo. Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we rt? In Proceedings of the first workshop on social media analytics, pages 71-79. ACM, 2010.
16. L. Page, S. Brin, R. Motwani, and T. Winograd. The pagerank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web, 1999.
17. W. Reinhardt, M. Ebner, G. Beham, and C. Costa. How people are using twitter during conferences. Creativity and innovation Competencies on the Web, page 145, 2009.
18. B. Rieder. The refraction chamber: Twitter as sphere and network. First Monday, 17(11), 2012.
19. C. Ross, M. Terras, C. Warwick, and A. Welsh. Enabled backchannel: conference twitter use by digital humanists. Journal of Documentation, 67(2):214-237, 2011.
20. A. Sopan, P. Rey, B. Butler, and B. Shneiderman. Monitoring academic conferences: Real-time visualization and retrospective analysis of backchannel conversations. In Social Informatics (SocialInformatics), 2012 International Conference on, pages 62-69. IEEE, 2012.
21. A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M. Welpe. Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. ICWSM, 10:178-185, 2010.
22. S. Wasserman and K. Faust. Social network analysis: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; New York, 1994.
23. K. Weller, E. Dröge, and C. Puschmann. Citation analysis in twitter: Approaches for defining and measuring information flows within tweets during scientific conferences. In Proceedings of Making Sense of Microposts Workshop (# MSM2011). Co-located with Extended Semantic Web Conference, Crete, Greece, 2011.
24. X. Wen, D. Parra, and C. Trattner. How groups of people interact with each other on twitter during academic conferences. In Proceedings of the Companion Publication of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, CSCW Companion '14, pages 253-256, New York, NY, USA, 2014. ACM.
25. A. Zubiaga, D. Spina, V. Fresno, and R. Martínez. Classifying trending topics: a typology of conversation triggers on twitter. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM international conference on Information and knowledge management, pages 2461-2464. ACM, 2011.