Dataset Information

What do computer scientists tweet? Analyzing the link-sharing practice on Twitter.

ABSTRACT: Twitter communication has permeated every sphere of society. To highlight and share small pieces of information with possibly vast audiences or small circles of the interested has some value in almost any aspect of social life. But what is the value exactly for a scientific field? We perform a comprehensive study of computer scientists using Twitter and their tweeting behavior concerning the sharing of web links. Discerning the domains, hosts and individual web pages being tweeted and the differences between computer scientists and a Twitter sample enables us to look in depth at the Twitter-based information sharing practices of a scientific community. Additionally, we aim at providing a deeper understanding of the role and impact of altmetrics in computer science and give a glance at the publications mentioned on Twitter that are most relevant for the computer science community. Our results show a link sharing culture that concentrates more heavily on public and professional quality information than the Twitter sample does. The results also show a broad variety in linked sources and especially in linked publications with some publications clearly related to community-specific interests of computer scientists, while others with a strong relation to attention mechanisms in social media. This refers to the observation that Twitter is a hybrid form of social media between an information service and a social network service. Overall the computer scientists' style of usage seems to be more on the information-oriented side and to some degree also on professional usage. Therefore, altmetrics are of considerable use in analyzing computer science.

SUBMITTER: Schmitt M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5479540 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

What do computer scientists tweet? Analyzing the link-sharing practice on Twitter.

Schmitt Marco M Jäschke Robert R

PloS one 20170621 6

Twitter communication has permeated every sphere of society. To highlight and share small pieces of information with possibly vast audiences or small circles of the interested has some value in almost any aspect of social life. But what is the value exactly for a scientific field? We perform a comprehensive study of computer scientists using Twitter and their tweeting behavior concerning the sharing of web links. Discerning the domains, hosts and individual web pages being tweeted and the differ ...[more]

PMID: 28636619

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite concerns about their health risks, e‑cigarettes have gained popularity in recent years. Concurrent with the recent increase in e‑cigarette use, social media sites such as Twitter have become a common platform for sharing information about e-cigarettes and to promote marketing of e‑cigarettes. Monitoring the trends in e‑cigarette-related social media activity requires timely assessment of the content of posts and the types of users generating the content. However, little is known about the diversity of the types of users responsible for generating e‑cigarette-related content on Twitter.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to demonstrate a novel methodology for automatically classifying Twitter users who tweet about e‑cigarette-related topics into distinct categories.MethodsWe collected approximately 11.5 million e‑cigarette-related tweets posted between November 2014 and October 2016 and obtained a random sample of Twitter users who tweeted about e‑cigarettes. Trained human coders examined the handles' profiles and manually categorized each as one of the following user types: individual (n=2168), vaper enthusiast (n=334), informed agency (n=622), marketer (n=752), and spammer (n=1021). Next, the Twitter metadata as well as a sample of tweets for each labeled user were gathered, and features that reflect users' metadata and tweeting behavior were analyzed. Finally, multiple machine learning algorithms were tested to identify a model with the best performance in classifying user types.ResultsUsing a classification model that included metadata and features associated with tweeting behavior, we were able to predict with relatively high accuracy five different types of Twitter users that tweet about e‑cigarettes (average F1 score=83.3%). Accuracy varied by user type, with F1 scores of individuals, informed agencies, marketers, spammers, and vaper enthusiasts being 91.1%, 84.4%, 81.2%, 79.5%, and 47.1%, respectively. Vaper enthusiasts were the most challenging user type to predict accurately and were commonly misclassified as marketers. The inclusion of additional tweet-derived features that capture tweeting behavior was found to significantly improve the model performance-an overall F1 score gain of 10.6%-beyond metadata features alone.ConclusionsThis study provides a method for classifying five different types of users who tweet about e‑cigarettes. Our model achieved high levels of classification performance for most groups, and examining the tweeting behavior was critical in improving the model performance. Results can help identify groups engaged in conversations about e‑cigarettes online to help inform public health surveillance, education, and regulatory efforts.

Project description:BackgroundThe amount of medical and clinical-related information on the Web is increasing. Among the different types of information available, social media-based data obtained directly from people are particularly valuable and are attracting significant attention. To encourage medical natural language processing (NLP) research exploiting social media data, the 13th NII Testbeds and Community for Information access Research (NTCIR-13) Medical natural language processing for Web document (MedWeb) provides pseudo-Twitter messages in a cross-language and multi-label corpus, covering 3 languages (Japanese, English, and Chinese) and annotated with 8 symptom labels (such as cold, fever, and flu). Then, participants classify each tweet into 1 of the 2 categories: those containing a patient's symptom and those that do not.ObjectiveThis study aimed to present the results of groups participating in a Japanese subtask, English subtask, and Chinese subtask along with discussions, to clarify the issues that need to be resolved in the field of medical NLP.MethodsIn summary, 8 groups (19 systems) participated in the Japanese subtask, 4 groups (12 systems) participated in the English subtask, and 2 groups (6 systems) participated in the Chinese subtask. In total, 2 baseline systems were constructed for each subtask. The performance of the participant and baseline systems was assessed using the exact match accuracy, F-measure based on precision and recall, and Hamming loss.ResultsThe best system achieved exactly 0.880 match accuracy, 0.920 F-measure, and 0.019 Hamming loss. The averages of match accuracy, F-measure, and Hamming loss for the Japanese subtask were 0.720, 0.820, and 0.051; those for the English subtask were 0.770, 0.850, and 0.037; and those for the Chinese subtask were 0.810, 0.880, and 0.032, respectively.ConclusionsThis paper presented and discussed the performance of systems participating in the NTCIR-13 MedWeb task. As the MedWeb task settings can be formalized as the factualization of text, the achievement of this task could be directly applied to practical clinical applications.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Scientific research in the 21st century is more data intensive and collaborative than in the past. It is important to study the data practices of researchers--data accessibility, discovery, re-use, preservation and, particularly, data sharing. Data sharing is a valuable part of the scientific method allowing for verification of results and extending research from prior results. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 1329 scientists participated in this survey exploring current data sharing practices and perceptions of the barriers and enablers of data sharing. Scientists do not make their data electronically available to others for various reasons, including insufficient time and lack of funding. Most respondents are satisfied with their current processes for the initial and short-term parts of the data or research lifecycle (collecting their research data; searching for, describing or cataloging, analyzing, and short-term storage of their data) but are not satisfied with long-term data preservation. Many organizations do not provide support to their researchers for data management both in the short- and long-term. If certain conditions are met (such as formal citation and sharing reprints) respondents agree they are willing to share their data. There are also significant differences and approaches in data management practices based on primary funding agency, subject discipline, age, work focus, and world region. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Barriers to effective data sharing and preservation are deeply rooted in the practices and culture of the research process as well as the researchers themselves. New mandates for data management plans from NSF and other federal agencies and world-wide attention to the need to share and preserve data could lead to changes. Large scale programs, such as the NSF-sponsored DataNET (including projects like DataONE) will both bring attention and resources to the issue and make it easier for scientists to apply sound data management principles.

Dataset Information

What do computer scientists tweet? Analyzing the link-sharing practice on Twitter.

Publications

What do computer scientists tweet? Analyzing the link-sharing practice on Twitter.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets