Testing propositions derived from twitter studies: Generalization and replication in computational social science

PLoS ONE

Volumn 10, Issue 8, 2015, Pages

  Liang, Hai ^a   Fu, King Wa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CONTENT ANALYSIS; FEASIBILITY STUDY; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; MATHEMATICAL COMPUTING; MULTIMEDIA; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; ONLINE SYSTEM; PREDICTION; SOCIAL BEHAVIOR; SOCIAL NETWORK; SOCIOLOGY; ATTENTION; CIRCADIAN RHYTHM; EGO; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PROCEDURES; SOCIAL MEDIA;

ATTENTION; CIRCADIAN RHYTHM; DATA COLLECTION; EGO; HUMANS; INFORMATION DISSEMINATION; SOCIAL MEDIA; SOCIAL SCIENCES;

EID: 84942627354     PISSN: None     EISSN: 19326203     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0134270     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. Lazer D, Pentland AS, Adamic L, Aral S, Barabasi AL, Brewer D, et al. Life in the network: The coming age of computational social science. Science. 2009; 323(5915): 721-723. PMID: 19197046
2. Strohmaier M, Wagner C. Computational Social Science for the World Wide Web. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 2014; 29(5): 84-88.
3. Watts DJ. Computational social science: Exciting progress and future directions. The Bridge on Frontiers of Engineering. 2013; 43(4): 5-10.
4. Golder SA, Macy MW. Digital footprints: Opportunities and challenges for online social research. Annual Review of Sociology. 2014; 40(1): 129-152.
5. Kwak H, Lee C, Park H, Moon S, editors. What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World wide web; 2010: ACM.
6. Myers SA, Sharma A, Gupta P, Lin J, editors. Information network or social network?: the structure of the twitter follow graph. Proceedings of the companion publication of the 23rd international conference on World wide web companion; 2014: International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee.
7. Ruths D, Pfeffer J. Social media for large studies of behavior. Science. 2014; 346(6213): 1063-1064. doi: 10.1126/science.346.6213.1063 PMID: 25430759
8. De Choudhury M, Lin Y-R, Sundaram H, Candan KS, Xie L, Kelliher A. How does the data sampling strategy impact the discovery of information diffusion in social media? ICWSM. 2010; 10: 34-41.
9. González-Bailón S, Wang N, Rivero A, Borge-Holthoefer J, Moreno Y. Assessing the bias in samples of large online networks. Social Networks. 2014; 38: 16-27.
10. Morstatter F, Pfeffer J, Liu H, Carley KM, editors. Is the sample good enough? Comparing data from Twitter's streaming API with Twitter's firehose. ICWSM; 2013.
11. Fu KW, Chau M. Reality check for the Chinese microblog space: a random sampling approach. PLOS ONE. 2013; 8(3): e58356. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058356 PMID: 23520502
12. Zhu JJH, Mo Q, Wang F, Lu H. A random digit search (RDS) method for sampling of blogs and other user-generated content. Social Science Computer Review. 2011; 29(3): 327-339.
13. Pareto V, Page AN. Translation of Manuale di economia politica ("Manual of political economy"). AM Kelley. 1971.
14. Huberman BA, Romero DM, Wu F. Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope. First Monday. 2009; 14(1). Available: http://pear.accc.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2317 .
15. Wilkinson DM, editor Strong regularities in online peer production. Proceedings of the 9th ACM conference on Electronic commerce; 2008: ACM.
16. Zhou Z, Bandari R, Kong J, Qian H, Roychowdhury V, editors. Information resonance on twitter: watching iran. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics; 2010: ACM.
17. Clauset A, Shalizi CR, Newman MEJ. Power-law distributions in empirical data. SIAM Review. 2009; 51(4): 661-703.
18. Yu L, Asur S, Huberman BA. What trends in Chinese social media; 2011. Preprint. Available: arXiv preprint arXiv: 11073522. 2011. Accessed 17 March 2015.
19. Boyd D, Golder S, Lotan G, editors. Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, HICSS'10; 2010: IEEE.
20. Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A, Pezzoni F, editors. Ego networks in twitter: An experimental analysis. INFOCOM, 2013 Proceedings IEEE; 2013; Turin, Italy IEEE.
21. Gao Q, Abel F, Houben G-J, Yu Y. A comparative study of users'microblogging behavior on Sina Weibo and Twitter. User modeling, adaptation, and personalization: Springer; 2012. p. 88-101.
22. Chalmers D, Fleming S, Wakeman I, Watson D, editors. Rhythms in twitter. Privacy, security, risk and trust (passat), 2011 ieee third international conference on and 2011 ieee third international conference on social computing (socialcom); 2011: IEEE.
23. Golder SA, Wilkinson DM, Huberman BA. Rhythms of social interaction: Messaging within a massive online network. Communities and Technologies 2007: Springer; 2007. p. 41-66.
24. Huberman BA, Romero DM, Wu F. Crowdsourcing, attention and productivity. Journal of Information Science. 2009; 35(6): 758-765.
25. Java A, Song X, Finin T, Tseng B, editors. Why we twitter: understanding microblogging usage and communities. Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on Web mining and social network analysis; 2007: ACM.
26. Golder SA, Yardi S, editors. Structural predictors of tie formation in twitter: Transitivity and mutuality. Social Computing (SocialCom), 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on; 2010: IEEE.
27. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Cook JM. Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology. 2001; 27: 415-444.
28. Watts DJ, Strogatz SH. Collective dynamics of 'small-world'networks. Nature. 1998; 393(6684): 440-442. PMID: 9623998
29. Newman ME. Mixing patterns in networks. Physical Review E. 2003; 67(2): 026126.
30. Weng J, Lim E-P, Jiang J, He Q, editors. Twitterrank: finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. Proceedings of the third ACM international conference on Web search and data mining; 2010: ACM.
31. Conover M, Ratkiewicz J, Francisco M, Gonçalves B, Menczer F, Flammini A. Political polarization on twitter. ICWSM; 2011.
32. Bliss CA, Kloumann IM, Harris KD, Danforth CM, Dodds PS. Twitter reciprocal reply networks exhibit assortativity with respect to happiness. Journal of Computational Science. 2012; 3(5): 388-397.
33. Bollen J, Goncalves B, Ruan GC, Mao HN. Happiness is assortative in online social networks. Artificial Life. 2011; 17(3): 237-251. doi: 10.1162/artl-A-00034 PMID: 21554117
34. Hale SA, editor. Global connectivity and multilinguals in the Twitter network. Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on Human factors in computing systems; 2014: ACM.
35. Dunbar RIM. Neocortex size as a constraint on group-size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution. 1992; 22(6): 469-493.
36. Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A, Dunbar R. Dynamics of personal social relationships in online social networks: a study on twitter. Proceedings of the First ACM Conference on Online Social Networks, WSDM'13; New York, NY, USA: ACM; 2013. p. 15-26.
37. Gonçalves B, Perra N, Vespignani A. Modeling users'activity on twitter networks: Validation of dunbar's number. PLOS ONE. 2011; 6(8): e22656. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0022656 PMID: 21826200
38. Huberman BA, Romero DM, Wu F. Crowdsourcing, attention and productivity. Journal of Information Science. 2009; 35(6): 758-765.
39. Cha M, Haddadi H, Benevenuto F, Gummadi PK. Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. ICWSM. 2010; 10: 10-17.
40. Bakshy E, Rosenn I, Marlow C, Adamic L. The role of social networks in information diffusion. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW '12; New York, NY, USA.: ACM; 2012. p. 519-528.
41. Suh B, Hong L, Pirolli P, Chi EH, editors. Want to be retweeted? large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in twitter network. Social computing (socialcom), 2010 ieee second international conference on; 2010: IEEE.
42. Grabowicz PA, Ramasco JJ, Moro E, Pujol JM, Eguiluz VM. Social features of online networks: The strength of intermediary ties in online social media. PLOS ONE. 2012; 7(1): e29358. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029358 PMID: 22247773
43. Centola D. The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science. 2010; 329(5996): 1194-1197. doi: 10.1126/science.1185231 PMID: 20813952
44. Centola D, Macy M. Complex contagions and the weakness of long ties1. American Journal of Sociology. 2007; 113(3): 702-734.
45. Romero DM, Meeder B, Kleinberg J, editors. 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; 2011: ACM.
46. Hodas NO, Lerman K. The simple rules of social contagion. Scientific Reports. 2014; 4. doi: 10.1038/srep04343
47. Li P, Li W, Wang H, Zhang X. Modeling of information diffusion in Twitter-like social networks under information overload. Sci World J. 2014; 2014: 1-8.
48. Weng L, Menczer F, Ahn Y-Y. Virality prediction and community structure in social networks. Scientific Reports. 2013; 3. doi: 10.1038/srep02522
49. Gayo-Avello D. A meta-analysis of state-of-The-art electoral prediction from Twitter data. Social Science Computer Review. 2013; 31(6): 649-679.
50. Fu KW, Chan CH. Analyzing online sentiment to predict telephone poll results. Cyberpsych Beh Soc N. 2013; 16(9): 702-707.