Information Sharing by Viewers Via Second Screens for In-Real-Life Events

The use of second screen devices with social media facilitates conversational interaction concerning broadcast media events, creating what we refer to as the social soundtrack. In this research, we evaluate the change of the Super Bowl XLIX social soundtrack across three social media platforms on the topical categories of commercials, music, and game at three game phases (Pre, During, and Post). We perform statistical analysis on more than 3M, 800K, and 50K posts from Twitter, Instagram, and Tumblr, respectively. Findings show that the volume of posts in the During phase is fewer compared to Pre and Post phases; however, the hourly mean in the During phase is considerably higher than it is in the other two phases. We identify the predominant phase and category of interaction across all three social media sites. We also determine the significance of change in absolute scale across the Super Bowl categories (commercials, music, game) and in both absolute and relative scales across Super Bowl phases (Pre, During, Post) for the three social network platforms (Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram). Results show that significant phase-category relationships exist for all three social networks. The results identify the During phase as the predominant one for all three categories on all social media sites with respect to the absolute volume of conversations in a continuous scale. From the relative volume perspective, the During phase is highest for the music category for most social networks. For the commercials and game categories, however, the Post phase is higher than the During phase for Twitter and Instagram, respectively. Regarding category identification, the game category is the highest for Twitter and Instagram but not for Tumblr, which has dominant peaks for music and/or commercials in all three phases. It is apparent that different social media platforms offer various phase and category affordances. These results are important in identifying the influence that second screen technology has on information sharing across different social media platforms and indicates that the viewer role is transitioning from passive to more active.

[1]  Antti Oulasvirta,et al.  Habits make smartphone use more pervasive , 2011, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[2]  B. Hutchins,et al.  The Web 2.0 Olympics , 2010 .

[3]  Matthew K. O. Lee,et al.  User satisfaction with microblogging: Information dissemination versus social networking , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[4]  Evelien D'heer,et al.  Second screen applications and tablet users: constellation, awareness, experience, and interest , 2012, EuroITV.

[5]  Sanghee Oh,et al.  Motivations for sharing information and social support in social media: A comparative analysis of Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, and Flickr , 2015, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[6]  W. Shrank,et al.  Online Social Networking by Patients with Diabetes: A Qualitative Evaluation of Communication with Facebook , 2011, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[7]  Matei Mancas,et al.  Second screen interaction: an approach to infer tv watcher's interest using 3d head pose estimation , 2013, WWW '13 Companion.

[8]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth , 2009, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[9]  David Lazer,et al.  Voices of victory: a computational focus group framework for tracking opinion shift in real time , 2013, WWW '13.

[10]  Arno Scharl,et al.  Analyzing the public discourse on works of fiction – Detection and visualization of emotion in online coverage about HBO’s Game of Thrones , 2016, Inf. Process. Manag..

[11]  L. Palen Online Social Media in Crisis Events. , 2008 .

[12]  Claire Cardie,et al.  Sentiment analysis on evolving social streams: how self-report imbalances can help , 2014, WSDM.

[13]  Alexandre Fleury,et al.  Interactive TV: Interaction and Control in Second-screen TV Consumption , 2012 .

[14]  Sei-Ching Joanna Sin Social media and problematic everyday life information‐seeking outcomes: Differences across use frequency, gender, and problem‐solving styles , 2016, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[15]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Who says what to whom on twitter , 2011, WWW.

[16]  Yan Liu,et al.  What is Tumblr: a statistical overview and comparison , 2014, SKDD.

[17]  Edward A. Fox,et al.  Searching the World-Wide Web: Implications From Studying Different User Behavior , 1998, World Conference on the WWW and Internet.

[18]  Gabi Schaap,et al.  "TV no longer commands our full attention": Effects of second-screen viewing and task relevance on cognitive load and learning from news , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  Shrikanth S. Narayanan,et al.  A System for Real-time Twitter Sentiment Analysis of 2012 U.S. Presidential Election Cycle , 2012, ACL.

[20]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Evaluating pattern for group interactions using second screens , 2015, 2015 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC).

[21]  Roi Blanco,et al.  IntoNews: Online news retrieval using closed captions , 2015, Inf. Process. Manag..

[22]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Second screen interaction analysis for IRL events: Phase-category investigation of the super bowl 2015 social soundtrack , 2016, 2016 7th International Conference on Information and Communication Systems (ICICS).

[23]  Fabio Giglietto,et al.  Second Screen and Participation: A Content Analysis on a Full Season Dataset of Tweets , 2014 .

[24]  Lada A. Adamic,et al.  The role of social networks in information diffusion , 2012, WWW.

[25]  Jehan Wickramasuriya,et al.  Analyzing Twitter for Social TV : Sentiment Extraction for Sports , 2011 .

[26]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Analyzing the social soundtrack from second screens before, during, and after Real-life events , 2015, 2015 IEEE Jordan Conference on Applied Electrical Engineering and Computing Technologies (AEECT).

[27]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Business engagement on Twitter: a path analysis , 2011, Electron. Mark..

[28]  J JansenBernard,et al.  Information Sharing by Viewers Via Second Screens for In-Real-Life Events , 2017 .

[29]  Hyeoncheol Lee,et al.  The Influence of Social Media: Twitter Usage Pattern during the 2014 Super Bowl Game , 2015, MUE 2015.

[30]  Bruno Schivinski,et al.  The effect of social media communication on consumer perceptions of brands , 2016 .

[31]  Subbarao Kambhampati,et al.  What We Instagram: A First Analysis of Instagram Photo Content and User Types , 2014, ICWSM.

[32]  Yutaka Matsuo,et al.  Earthquake shakes Twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors , 2010, WWW '10.

[33]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Classifying ecommerce information sharing behaviour by youths on social networking sites , 2011, J. Inf. Sci..

[34]  Chao Liu,et al.  Recommender systems with social regularization , 2011, WSDM '11.

[35]  Adrian Benton The Spoiler Effect ? : Designing Social TV Content That Promotes Ongoing WOM , 2012 .

[36]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Social TV and the Social Soundtrack: Significance of Second Screen Interaction during Television Viewing , 2014, SBP.

[37]  B. Jansen,et al.  Patterns of Social Media Conversations Using Second Screens , 2014 .

[38]  S. J. Chinn,et al.  Meeting Relationship-Marketing Goals Through Social Media: A Conceptual Model for Sport Marketers , 2010 .

[39]  B. Lindsay Social Media and Disasters: Current Uses, Future Options, and Policy Considerations , 2011 .

[40]  Crysta J. Metcalf,et al.  FANFEEDS: evaluation of socially generated information feed on second screen as a TV show companion , 2012, EuroITV.

[41]  Bernard J. Jansen,et al.  Analyzing Second Screen Based Social Soundtrack of TV Viewers from Diverse Cultural Settings , 2015, SBP.

[42]  R. Cooper,et al.  Gender, Sports, and New Media: Predictors of Viewing during the 2008 Beijing Olympics , 2012 .

[43]  Paul Coulton,et al.  Sharing the viewing experience through second screens , 2012, EuroITV.