Abstract
Well beyond Internet Studies itself, but arguably led by it to a considerable extent, there has been a turn towards computational methods in the study of social and communicative phenomena at large scale. This “computational turn” has commonly been described as a turn towards “big data” or, more specifically, towards “big social data,” and it continues to drive the development of new research methodologies, approaches, and tools.
Internet Studies has been an advocate of “big data” approaches, because the field connects several core disciplines that use “big data” methods – media, communication and cultural studies, the social sciences, and computer science. Equally, the major objects of research in Internet Studies – including platforms, search engines, mobile apps and devices, and Internet technologies and networks themselves – are key sources of “big data” on user interests, attitudes, and activities. Proponents of such approaches suggest that it is becoming possible to “study society with the Internet,” while others ask critical questions about which observations are privileged and which are discounted as the logic of “big data” influences research agendas.
The early development and application of “big social data” research methods in Internet Studies, as well as critical interrogations of such approaches, focused especially on research into Twitter as a global social media platform. This is largely due to Twitter’s (initially) highly accessible application programming interface (API), which enabled the development of powerful research methods and the promise of large, sometimes real-time, datasets tracing patterns of user activity around specific themes and topics on the platform, as well as, by proxy, in wider society.
Twitter’s tightening of API access serves as a reminder of the precarious nature of “big social data” research drawing on proprietary datasets, just as concerns about the use of social media data for the social profiling of individual users raise questions about research ethics and user privacy. The growing body of “big data” research drawing on Twitter as a data source has paradoxically also underlined the many limitations and blind spots of such approaches, as researchers drawing on publicly available API data struggle to place their findings in the context of a platform whose overall global shape is shrouded in considerably more mystery, due to Twitter, Inc.’s interest in keeping aspects of the platform and its user community commercial-in-confidence. The increased work in this field also highlights shortcomings in research training and publishing models, which need to be addressed to further develop “big social data” research.
This chapter outlines the current state of the art in computationally driven Twitter research, using platform-specific research as a case study for the computational turn in Internet Studies. It will consider the opportunities and challenges inherent in this shift toward more data-driven research and outline the key needs for the discipline which have emerged to date. Even as Twitter’s own fortunes fluctuate, the experiences made in this branch of Internet Studies stand as a guide for broader developments in our field.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acar A, Muraki Y (2011) Twitter for crisis communication: lessons learned from Japan’s tsunami disaster. Int J Web Based Commun 7(3):392–402
Andrejevic M (2014) Surveillance in the big data era. In: Pimple KD (ed) Emerging pervasive information and communication technologies (PICT): ethical challenges, opportunities and safeguards. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 55–69
Arthur PL, Bode K (eds) (2014) Advancing digital humanities: research, methods, theories. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills
Berry D (2011) The computational turn: thinking about the digital humanities. Cult Mach 12:1–22 Retrieved from http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/view/440/470
boyd d, Crawford K (2012) Critical questions for big data. Information. Commun Soc 15(5):662–679
Bruno N (2011) Tweet first, verify later? How real-time information is changing the coverage of worldwide crisis events. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, University of Oxford, Oxford Retrieved from https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/Tweet%20first%20%2C%20verify%20later%20How%20real-time%20information%20is%20changing%20the%20coverage%20of%20worldwide%20crisis%20events.pdf
Bruns A (2013) Faster than the speed of print: reconciling “Big Data” social media analysis and academic scholarship. First Monday, 18(10). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/4879
Bruns A (2014) Twitter in the 2013 Australian election. Paper presented at the Australia New Zealand workshop on campaign management and political marketing, Sydney, 17–18 July 2014
Bruns A, Burgess J (2011) #ausvotes: how Twitter covered the 2010 Australian federal election. Commun Polit Culture 44(2):37–56 Retrieved from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/47816/
Bruns A, Highfield T (2016) May the best tweeter win: the Twitter strategies of key campaign accounts in the 2012 US election. In: Bieber C, Kamps K (eds) The United States presidential election 2012. Springer, Wiesbaden, pp 425–442
Bruns A, Sauter T (2015) Anatomie eines Trending Topics: Retweet-Ketten als Verbreitungsmechanismus für aktuelle Ereignisse. In: Maireder A, Ausserhofer J, Schumann C, Taddicken M (eds) Digitale Methoden in der Kommunikationswissenschaft. Berlin: Institut für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, Freie Universität Berlin, pp 141–161
Bruns A, Stieglitz S (2012) Quantitative approaches to comparing communication patterns on Twitter. J Technol Hum Serv 30(3–4):160–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228835.2012.744249
Bruns A, Stieglitz S (2013) Towards more systematic Twitter analysis: metrics for tweeting activities. Int J Soc Res Methodol 16(2):91–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2012.756095
Bruns A, Highfield T, Harrington S (2013) Sharing the news: dissemination of links to Australian news sites on Twitter. In: Gordon J, Rowinski P, Stewart G (eds) Br(e)aking the news: journalism, politics and new media. Peter Lang, New York, pp 181–210
Bruns A, Woodford D, Sadkowsky T (2014a) Exploring the global demographics of Twitter. Paper presented at the Association of Internet Researchers conference, Daegu, 22–25 Oct 2014
Bruns A, Woodford D, Highfield T, Prowd K (2014b) Mapping social TV audiences: the footprints of leading shows in the Australian Twittersphere. Paper presented at the Association of Internet Researchers conference, Daegu, 22–25 Oct 2014
Burgess J, Bruns A (2012) Twitter archives and the challenges of “Big Social Data” for media and communication research. M/C Journal 15(5). Retrieved from http://journal.media-culture.org.au/index.php/mcjournal/article/viewArticle/561/0
Burgess J, Bruns A (2015) Easy data, hard data: the politics and pragmatics of Twitter research after the computational turn. In: Langlois G, Redden J, Elmer G (eds) Compromised data: from social media to big data. Bloomsbury, London, pp 68–88
Conway BA, Kenski K, Wang D (2013) Twitter use by presidential primary candidates during the 2012 campaign. Am Behav Sci 57(11):1596–1610
Dixon D (2012) Analysis tool or research methodology: is there an epistemology for patterns? In: Berry DM (ed) Understanding digital humanities. Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills, pp 191–209
Doan S, Vo BKH, Collier N (2012) An analysis of Twitter messages in the 2011 Tohoku earthquake. In: Kostkova P, Szomsor M, Fowler D (eds) eHealth 2011. Springer, Berlin, pp 58–66
Gaffney D (2010) #iranElection: quantifying online activism. proceedings of the WebSci10: extending the frontiers of society on-line, 26–27 Apr 2010, Raleigh, NC. Retrieved from http://journal.webscience.org/295/
Golbeck J, Grimes JM, Rogers A (2010) Twitter use by the US Congress. J Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 61(8):1612–1621
Harrington, S., T. Highfield, & A. Bruns. (2013). More than a backchannel: Twitter and television participations. J Aud Rec Stud, 10(1), 405–409. Retrieved from http://www.participations.org/Volume 10/Issue 1/30 Harrington et al 10.1.pdf
Highfield T, Harrington S, Bruns A (2013) Twitter as a Technology for Audiencing and Fandom: the #Eurovision phenomenon. Inform Commun Soc 16(3):315–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.756053
Hughes AL, Palen L (2009) Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. Int J Emerg Manag 6(3–4):248–260
Hughes AL, St Denis LA, Palen L, Anderson KM (2014) Online public communications by police & fire services during the 2012 Hurricane Sandy. In: Proceedings of the 32nd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems. ACM, 1505–1514
Kirkorian R (2014) Twitter #DataGrants selections. Twitter Engineering Blog 17 Apr 2014. Retrieved from https://blog.twitter.com/2014/twitter-datagrants-selections
Larsson AO, Moe H (2011) Studying political microblogging: Twitter users in the 2010 Swedish election campaign. New Media Soc 14(5):729–747. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444811422894
Lotan G, Graeff E, Ananny M, Gaffney D, Pearce I, boyd d (2011) The Arab spring: the revolutions were tweeted: information flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. Int J Commun 5:1375–1405
Lunden I (2015) Twitter cuts off DataSift to step up its own big data business. Techcrunch 11 Apr 2015. Retrieved from http://techcrunch.com/2015/04/11/twitter-cuts-off-datasift-to-step-up-its-own-b2b-big-data-analytics-business
Manovich L (2012) Trending: the promises and the challenges of big social data. In: Gold MK (ed) Debates in the digital humanities. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 460–475
Mendoza M, Poblete B, Castillo C (2010) Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we RT? Paper presented at the 1st workshop on Social Media Analytics (SOMA ‘10). ACM, Washington, DC
Meraz S, Papacharissi Z (2013) Networked gatekeeping and networked framing on #Egypt. Int J Press Polit 18(2):138–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/194016121247447
Mourtada R, Salem F (2011) Civil movements: the impact of Facebook and Twitter. Arab Social Media Report, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.dsg.ae/En/Publication/Pdf_En/DSG_Arab_Social_Media_Report_No_2.pdf
Palen L, Starbird K, Vieweg S, Hughes A (2010) Twitter-based information distribution during the 2009 Red River Valley flood threat. Bull Am Soc Inf Sci Technol 36(5):13–17
Puschmann C, Burgess J (2014) The politics of Twitter data. In: Weller K et al (eds) Twitter and society. Peter Lang, New York, pp 43–54
Rogers R (2009) The end of the virtual: digital methods. Vossiuspers UvA, Amsterdam. Retrieved from http://www.govcom.org/publications/full_list/oratie_Rogers_2009_preprint.pdf
Rogers R, Jansen F, Stevenson M, Weltevrede E (2009) Mapping democracy. Paper presented at Global Information Society Watch 2009, Association for Progressive Communications and Hivos. Retrieved from http://www.giswatch.org/sites/default/files/mappingdemocracy.pdf
Sarcevic A, Palen L, White J, Starbird K, Bagdouri M, Anderson K (2012) ‘Beacons of hope’ in decentralized coordination: learning from on-the-ground medical twitterers during the 2010 Haiti earthquake. Retrieved from http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~palen/Home/Crisis_Informatics_files/Sarcevic-et-al-HaitiMedicalTwitterers.pdf
Silicon Graphics (2015) Global Twitter heartbeat. Retrieved from http://www.sgi.com/go/twitter/
Twitter, Inc (2015) About Twitter, Inc. Retrieved from https://about.twitter.com/company
Vergeer M, Hermans L (2013) Campaigning on Twitter: microblogging and online social networking as campaign tools in the 2010 general elections in the Netherlands. J Comput-Mediat Commun 18(4):399–419
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature B.V.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Bruns, A. (2020). Big Social Data Approaches in Internet Studies: The Case of Twitter. In: Hunsinger, J., Allen, M., Klastrup, L. (eds) Second International Handbook of Internet Research. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1555-1_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1555-1_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-024-1553-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-024-1555-1
eBook Packages: Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences