Everyday life information experiences in Twitter: a grounded theory

Introduction. This paper presents the findings from a project that investigated people's everyday life information experiences on Twitter. Method. The project employed constructivist grounded theory methodology, which emphasizes personal, subjective meaning-making or construction of reality. Eleven people from Boston, Massachusetts participated in the study. Each person participated in two in-depth interviews. Analysis. The study used the methods of constant comparison to create codes and categories towards constructing a new substantive model of information experiences on Twitter in the context of everyday life. Results. The substantive model constructed consists of twelve categories: being aware of audiences; making sense of uncertainty; being part of a community; conversing freely; observing the world; having instant sources; being humorous; documenting life moments; being dependent; selfregulating; broadening horizons; and valuing diverse voices. Conclusion. A conceptual model of people's everyday life experiences on Twitter was developed from an innovative information experience lens. The model can be used to inform research and design, and to lead to better digital, social and personal outcomes related to social media.

[1]  Natalie Lee-San Pang,et al.  Twittering the Little India Riot: Audience responses, information behavior and the use of emotive cues , 2016, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[2]  Mark Strembeck,et al.  An Analysis of the Twitter Discussion on the 2016 Austrian Presidential Elections , 2017, Online Soc. Networks Media.

[3]  Toine Bogers,et al.  Micro-serendipity: Meaningful Coincidences in Everyday Life Shared on Twitter , 2013 .

[4]  A. Dobson,et al.  Digital intimate publics and social media , 2018 .

[5]  Helen L. Partridge,et al.  Exploring information experience using social media during the 2011 Queensland Floods: a pilot study , 2012 .

[6]  Stefan Stieglitz,et al.  Emotions and Information Diffusion in Social Media—Sentiment of Microblogs and Sharing Behavior , 2013, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Lindsey Meeks.  Tweeted, deleted: theoretical, methodological, and ethical considerations for examining politicians’ deleted tweets , 2018 .

[8]  Kate Davis,et al.  Beyond broadcasting: Customer service, community and information experience in the Twittersphere , 2012 .

[9]  Dave Barker-Plummer,et al.  Twitter as a Feminist Resource: #YesAllWomen, Digital Platforms, and Discursive Social Change , 2017 .

[10]  ชวิตรา ตันติมาลา.  Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis , 2017 .

[11]  Jaigris Hodson,et al.  Women scholars’ experiences with online harassment and abuse: Self-protection, resistance, acceptance, and self-blame , 2018, New Media Soc..

[12]  Gregory J. L. Tourte,et al.  Twitter, information sharing and the London riots? , 2012 .

[13]  Digital ethnography as a way to explore information grounds on Twitter , 2016 .

[14]  Jewelry Yep,et al.  Leveraging the Power of a Twitter Network for Library Promotion , 2015 .

[15]  Kate Davis.  The information experience of new mothers in social media: A grounded theory study , 2015 .

[16]  Akemi Takeoka Chatfield,et al.  Twitter tsunami early warning network : a social network analysis of Twitter information flows , 2012 .

[17]  Alistair Willis,et al.  Mapping networks of influence: tracking Twitter conversations through time and space , 2015 .

[18]  Helen Partridge,et al.  Informed Democracy: Information Experiences during the 2012 Queensland Election , 2014 .

[19]  Lynne M. Coventry,et al.  Security information sharing via Twitter: 'Heartbleed' as a case study , 2017, Int. J. Web Based Communities.

[20]  Yunfei Du,et al.  Data‐activism as civic engagement: Forming a narrative to foster social change on gun control in the United States , 2018 .

[21]  Grant Blank,et al.  The echo chamber is overstated: the moderating effect of political interest and diverse media , 2018 .

[22]  Christian Pieter Hoffmann,et al.  It's All About Information? The Following Behaviour of Professors and PhD Students in Computer Science on Twitter , 2017, J. Web Sci..

[23]  Huan Chen.  College-aged young consumers’ interpretation of Twitter and marketing information on Twitter , 2015 .

[24]  Hilary E. Hughes,et al.  Researching information experience: methodological snapshots , 2014 .

[25]  Royce Kimmons,et al.  Scholars in an increasingly open and digital world: How do education professors and students use Twitter? , 2016, Internet High. Educ..

[26]  Benjamin Gleason.  New literacies practices of teenage Twitter users , 2016 .

[27]  Kaja J. Fietkiewicz,et al.  Information Behavior on Social Live Streaming Services , 2016 .

[28]  Helen Partridge,et al.  Exploring the role of Twitter in the professional practice of LIS professionals: a pilot study , 2013 .

[29]  R. Emsley,et al.  #WhyWeTweetMH: Understanding Why People Use Twitter to Discuss Mental Health Problems , 2017, Journal of medical Internet research.

[30]  D. Denegri,et al.  Association between social media use (Twitter, Instagram, Facebook) and depressive symptoms: Are Twitter users at higher risk? , 2018, The International journal of social psychiatry.

[31]  Christine S. Bruce.  Information Experience: Approaches to Theory and Practice , 2014 .

[32]  Helen Partridge,et al.  Citizens and social media in times of natural disaster: exploring information experience , 2015, Inf. Res..

[33]  Brian G. Knight,et al.  Homophily, Group Size, and the Diffusion of Political Information in Social Networks: Evidence from Twitter , 2014 .

[34]  Wolfgang Jank,et al.  Real-Time Diffusion of Information on Twitter and the Financial Markets , 2016, PloS one.

[35]  Frances Shaw,et al.  Empathy Rituals: Small Conversations about Emotional Distress on Twitter , 2019 .

[36]  Scott H. Burton,et al.  Use of Twitter Among Local Health Departments: An Analysis of Information Sharing, Engagement, and Action , 2013, Journal of medical Internet research.