The Ontology of Tweets: Mixed-Method Approaches to the Study of Twitter

This chapter focuses on Twitter and the unique challenges associated with data collection and analysis on this microblogging platform. Specifically, many big data approaches that are popular for studying tweets are tremendously useful, but are often ill-suited to more in-depth contextualized analysis of tweets. The chapter speaks to this issue and proposes alternative approaches to create a more balanced means of analysis. Further, the chapter proposes a framework to categorize tweets, addressing issues of ontology and coding. It draws on qualitative approaches, such as grounded theory, to demonstrate the value of a solid coding scheme for the qualitative analysis of tweets. To illustrate the value of this approach, the chapter draws on a case study, the Twitter response to the controversial song Accidental Racist, and shows examples of how this emergent coding of Twitter corpora can be done in practice. This case study illustrates how the proposed approaches offer ways to tackle themes such as racism or sarcasm, which have been traditionally difficult to interpret. Finally, the chapter draws some conclusions around a) Twitter as a platform for mixed methods approaches, and b) the value of relying on established approaches, like grounded theory, to inform Twitter analysis.

[1]  S. Herring,et al.  Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter , 2009, 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[2]  Dhiraj Murthy,et al.  Urban Social Media Demographics: An Exploration of Twitter Use in Major American Cities , 2016, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[3]  R. Procter,et al.  Reading the riots on Twitter: methodological innovation for the analysis of big data , 2013 .

[4]  Gabriele Paul,et al.  Approaches to abductive reasoning: an overview , 1993, Artificial Intelligence Review.

[5]  R. Kozinets Netnography: Doing Ethnographic Research Online , 2009 .

[6]  D. Murthy Twitter: Social Communication in the Twitter Age , 2013 .

[7]  Timothy S. Murphy Ontology, Deconstruction, and Empire , 2001 .

[8]  H. Ellenberg,et al.  Waldgesellschaften und Waldstandorte der Schweiz , 1972 .

[9]  Simon Lindgren,et al.  Pirate culture and hacktivist mobilization: The cultural and social protocols of #WikiLeaks on Twitter , 2011, New Media Soc..

[10]  Mario Cataldi,et al.  Emerging topic detection on Twitter based on temporal and social terms evaluation , 2010, MDMKDD '10.

[11]  Kathy Charmaz,et al.  Grounded Theory in Ethnography , 2001 .

[12]  Sarah Florini Tweets, Tweeps, and Signifyin’ , 2014 .

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

[14]  Diego Calvanese,et al.  The Description Logic Handbook: Theory, Implementation, and Applications , 2003, Description Logic Handbook.

[15]  L. Manovich,et al.  The language of new media , 2001 .

[16]  Anabel Quan-Haase,et al.  Networks of digital humanities scholars: The informational and social uses and gratifications of Twitter , 2015, Big Data Soc..

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

[18]  Michael Hardt,et al.  Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire , 2004 .

[19]  Alan Bryman,et al.  Analyzing Qualitative Data , 1994 .

[20]  Wendy Olsen,et al.  Data Collection: Key Debates and Methods in Social Research , 2011 .

[21]  Johan Bollen,et al.  Modeling Public Mood and Emotion: Twitter Sentiment and Socio-Economic Phenomena , 2009, ICWSM.

[22]  D. Boyd,et al.  CRITICAL QUESTIONS FOR BIG DATA , 2012 .

[23]  Christina Goulding Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide for Management, Business and Market Researchers , 2002 .

[24]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[25]  Michael Zimmer,et al.  A topology of Twitter research: disciplines, methods, and ethics , 2014, Aslib J. Inf. Manag..

[26]  R. Bhaskar A realist theory of science , 1976 .

[27]  S. Halford,et al.  Big Data: Methodological Challenges and Approaches for Sociological Analysis , 2014 .

[28]  Balachander Krishnamurthy,et al.  A few chirps about twitter , 2008, WOSN '08.

[29]  N. Hoffart Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory , 2000 .

[30]  M. Williams,et al.  Who Tweets? Deriving the Demographic Characteristics of Age, Occupation and Social Class from Twitter User Meta-Data , 2015, PloS one.

[31]  Leysia Palen,et al.  Online public communications by police & fire services during the 2012 Hurricane Sandy , 2014, CHI.

[32]  Dhiraj Murthy,et al.  Modeling virtual organizations with Latent Dirichlet Allocation: A case for natural language processing , 2014, Neural Networks.

[33]  Stephen Dann,et al.  Twitter content classification , 2010, First Monday.

[34]  Dhiraj Murthy,et al.  Emergent digital ethnographic methods for social research , 2011 .

[35]  H. Nicholls Grounded theory: a practical guide second edition , 2016 .

[36]  Sean P. Goggins,et al.  Sifting signal from noise: A new perspective on the meaning of tweets about the “big game” , 2016, New Media Soc..