• Like
Twitter 091010224906-phpapp01
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
41
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Twitter Analytics A user’s guide to interpreting, reinterpreting and misinterpreting the social media service. Dr Stephen Dann School of Management Marketing & International Business, Australian National University @stephendann or stephen.dann@anu.edu.au
  • 2. If you’re on Twitter Questions can be sent to @stephendann
  • 3. Twitter. Twitter matters because of what it is: at its heart, a platform that offers an exchange of ideas and information on an unprecedented scale. Why Twitter Matters : Marketing : Idea Hub :: American Express OPEN Forum http://www.openforum.com/idea-hub/topics/marketing/article/why-twitter-matters-ann-handley Fri Oct 02 2009 21:16:49 GMT+1000 (AUS Eastern Standard Time) Twitter in Plain English
  • 4. For those who came in late Twitter.com • 140 character message • Social network • Web2.0 • End of the world as we know it • Best thing since sliced bread
  • 5. Twitter! (What is it good for?) • health community (Berger 2009) • public libraries (Cahill 2009, Cuddy 2009) • political campaigns (Cetina 2009, Henneburg et al 2009) • business (Dudley 2009; Power and Forte 2008) • journalism (Ettama 2009) • civil unrest and protests (Fahmi 2009) • social activism (Galer-Unti 2009) • live coverage of events (Gay et al 2009) • eyewitness accounts (Lariscy et al 2009) • government (Macintosh 2009) • education (Parslow 2009).
  • 6. Uses and usage • casual listening platform (Crawford 2009), • creating the illusion of physicality (Hohl 2009) • sense of connectedness and relationship (Henneburg et al 2009) • venue for conversation (Steiner 2009)
  • 7. How to dissect a living medium?
  • 8. Raw Counts Tweetstats – www.tweetstats.com
  • 9. Text Analysis Tweetstats – www.tweetstats.com Wordle – wordle.com
  • 10. Leximancer Leximancer – www.leximancer.com
  • 11. Coded Content Analysis Made up for this set of slides.
  • 12. Same Data set… So many different ways to present the results
  • 13. Coded Content Analysis
  • 14. Social awareness streams Three factors 1. the public (or personal-public) nature of the communication and conversation 2. the brevity of posted content 3. highly connected social space / articulated online contact networks. Naaman, Boase, and Lai (2010), infolab.stanford.edu/~mor/research/naamanCSCW10.pdf
  • 15. Prior Analysis
  • 16. Analysis 1: Take the people out Krishnamurthy et al (2008) •users were classified by –follower/following counts, •Numbers and ratios –means and mechanisms of their engagement •Web (61.7%), mobile/text (7.5%), software (22.4%) –volume of use •Tweets per time period
  • 17. Analysis 2: Content Category Java et al 2007 • 1,348,543 tweets • 76,177 users • April 01, to May 30, 2007 Four meta-categories • daily chatter • conversations • information / URL sharing • news reporting
  • 18. Analysis 3: Insider Coding Jansen et al (2009) • tweets with brand name • expression of brand sentiment • 13-week period –April 4, 2008 to July 3, 2008. •650 reporting episodes –13 x 50 brands •149,472 tweets Sentiment Scale • No Sentiment • Wretched • Bad • So-so • Swell • Great Content Schema • Sentiment • Information seeking • Information providing • Comment
  • 19. Analysis 4: Pear’s Babble Pear Analytics (2009) • 2000 tweets • 11am to 5pm • 10 working days Six part classification • news (3.6%), • spam (3.75%), • self-promotion (5.85%), • pointless babble (40.55%) • conversational (37.55%) • pass-along value (8.70%).
  • 20. Analysis 5: Where’s the party @? Honeycutt and Herring (2009) • four one-hour samples • four-hour intervals • 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. Eastern Standard Time, on January 11, 2008 •Sample of 200 tweets coded with grounded methodology 1) Addressivity: Directs a message to another person 2) Reference: Makes reference to another person, but does not direct a message to him or her. 3) Emoticon: Used as part of an emoticon. 4) Email: Used as part of an email address. 5) Locational 'at': Signals where an entity is located. 6) Non-locational 'at': Used to represent the preposition 'at' other than in the sense of location. 7) Other: Uses not fitting into any other category,
  • 21. Analysis 6: Rigor and Bass Naaman, Boase and Lai (2010) • Sample of 400 tweets –more than one category was assigned to a single message. • Sampling frame –125,593 unique user IDs –‘personal’ Twitter users –10 friends, 10 followers, 10 messages –911 users •N = 350 users The Categories • Information Sharing • Self Promotion • Opinions/Complaints • Statements and Random Thoughts • Me now • Question to followers • Presence Maintenance • Anecdote (me) • Anecdote (others)
  • 22. The consistent theme People keep using Twitter for personal use. • Discussions of “self” • Pointless babble • Conversational All criticisms of the use of twitter for pleasure and personal consumption
  • 23. What Twitter looks like… …and how are people using Twitter? Twitter – www.twitter.com
  • 24. Recoding the Platform Let’s do it my way
  • 25. Theory and Ideology Useful versus Enjoyable Bohme (2006) outlines a propensity of society to classify technology of all forms into – “useful and therefore valuable” – “enjoyable, therefore irrelevant”. Böhme, G (2006) Technical Gadgetry: Technological Development in the Aesthetic Economy, Thesis Eleven, 86 (1): 54-66
  • 26. Method Grounded Theory • Broad categories based on / supported by six prior studies • Sub categories developed from theory and data
  • 27. Sample Personal Twitter History @stephendann (274 Following / 355 Followers) • 2841 messages • Mar 13 2007 to Aug 18 2009 @darthvader (5,513 Following / 113,624 Followers) • 484 messages • Jan 09 2007 to Sep 27 2009
  • 28. Sample @stephendann • 274 Following / 355 Followers – Supports Krishnamurthy et al (2008) 250 follower rule • 2841 tweets – Start: Tue Mar 13 2007 11:53:01 – End: Tue Aug 18 2009 07:29:30 • Data was captured from the timeline using the Sujathan (2009) “Twitter to pdf” software.
  • 29. Categories and Results
  • 30. Major Categories • Conversational – Uses an @statement to address another user • Status – An answer to “What are you doing now?”. • Pass along – Tweets of endorsement of content • News – Identifiable news content which is not UGC • Phatic – Content independent connected presence • Spam – Junk traffic, unsolicited automated posts, and other automated tweets generated without user consent
  • 31. Results- @stephendann Conversational (1473) 52% news (13) 0% Informal (103) 4% status (974) 34%pass_along (278) 10% phatic
  • 32. Minor Categories Conversational 1. Query 2. Referral 3. Action 4. Response Status 1. Personal 2. Temporal 3. Location 4. Mechanical 5. Physical 6. Work 7. Activity Pass along 1. RT 2. UGC 3. Endorsement News 1. Headlines 2. Sport 3. Event 4. Weather Phatic 1. Greeting 2. Fourth wall 3. Broadcast 4. Unclassifiable Spam
  • 33. Results - @stephendann
  • 34. Conversational • Query – Questions, question marks or polls • Referral – An @response which contains URLs or recommendation of other Twitter users. • Action – Activities involving other Twitter users • Response – Catch-all classification for conversation @tweets
  • 35. Conversational Category N % Exemplar Action 77 3% *waves at @USERNAME* Pass-along 66 2% @USERNAME Items under $1000 are exempt. http://is.gd/AV7K Query 480 17% Invading Germany from France. Who's with me? Response 850 30% @USERNAME Beware the polar bears. Category N % Word Count Words/ Sentence >6 letters Dictionary Words Linguistic Inquiry Results Action 77 3% 958 14.74 23.80 67.75 Conjunctions, Inhibition, Inclusive Biological processes Pass-along 66 2% 1020 18.89 21.86 54.31 OtherP, Period Query 480 17% 7032 10.13 21.22 75.33 Impersonal pronouns, Auxiliary verbs, Tentative, Discrepancy, QMark Response 850 30% 13637 17.05 21.97 73.84 3rd pers plural
  • 36. Conversational action 5% pass-along 4% query 33% response 58%
  • 37. Status (1 of 2) • Personal – Positive or negative sentiment in the form of personal opinion or emotional status • Temporal – References to specific dates, times, statements of temporal nature (waiting) and temporal action (“Time to” ) • Location – Geographic references and location statements, including statements of traveling, location change
  • 38. Status (2 of 2) • Mechanical – Technology or mechanical systems • Physical – Sensory experiences of a physical nature • Work – Reference to work related activity • Activity – Direct statements that answer “What are you doing now?”
  • 39. Status activity 35 1% Playing with the internet in the name of science broadcast 140 5% Diplomacy is the art of saying "Nice doggy" until you find a big enough rock. Captaincy is the timely provision of large enough rocks. location 69 2% Standing in a lecture theatre talking about Marketing Management. mechanical 106 4% Well... I'm in trouble. Used 3829.060MB (62.322%) of your 6GB. You have 22 days remaining personal 221 8% I liked Modest Mouse after they became famous. physical 37 1% It's freezing out there this morning temporal 170 6% Waiting for my 2pm performance review to start. work 196 7% Firing off e-mail after e-mail to clear my to do list (knowing that's a great way to regenerate to do list items doesn't stop me or help me) Category N % Word Count Words/ Sentence >6 letters Dictionary Words Linguistic Inquiry Results activity 35 1% 533 14.41 23.26 76.17 see, Ingestion,Achievement broadcast 140 5% 2119 11.21 22.84 71.21 Friends, Quote location 69 2% 1115 12.67 22.96 78.12 Articles, space mechanical 106 4% 1985 13.88 22.02 70.43 Sadness personal 221 8% 4121 19.35 19.05 80.71 Total function words, Common verbs, Past / Present tense, Adverbs, Cognitive processes, physical 37 1% 658 16.87 23.10 81.91 Perceptual processes, feel, body, health temporal 170 6% 3160 14.11 19.84 79.05 Prepositions work 196 7% 3881 16.59 23.96 80.19 Work
  • 40. Status activty 4% broadcast 14% location 7% mechanical 11% personal 23% physical 4% temporal 17% work 20%
  • 41. Pass along • RT – Any statement reproducing another Twitter status using the via @ or RT protocol • UGC – Links to content created by the user • Endorsement – Links to web content not created by the sender
  • 42. Pass Along Category N % Exemplar Pass along endorsement 108 4% I'm looking myself up on Publish or Perish (http://rurl.org/iw4) to find a reference to a paper that cited me because I want to cite them RT 48 2% L4D Survivors in Rockband2 singing L7 Pretend We're Dead. http://is.gd/BsVE (HT to @LesbianGamers ). It's seriously amazing. Ugc 122 4% http://twitpic.com/2o1c1 - Bus Slogan Generator Time - http://is.gd/hU2Q Category N % Word Count Words/ Sentence >6 letters Dictionary Words Linguistic Inquiry Results endorsement 108 4% 1777 30.12 21.05 55.71 Parenth, Dash RT 48 2% 893 16.85 24.75 54.31 SemiC Ugc 122 4% 1679 39.98 20.61 52.89 Numbers, leisure
  • 43. Pass Along endorsement 39% RT 17% ugc 44%
  • 44. News • Headlines – Coverage of breaking news and personal eye-witness accounts of news events • Sport – Identifiable results of sporting events • Event – Any tweet which represents the live discussion of an identified or identifiable event • Weather – Report of weather conditions without commentary
  • 45. News Category N % Exemplar News Event 13 0% Between NASA's satellite and autoanalysis of imagery, and Google Map data, scientific proof where there's smoke, there's fires #bcc2 Sport - - - Headlines - - - Category N % Word Count Words/ Sentence >6 letters Dictionary Words Linguistic Inquiry Results News Event 13 0% 192 10.67 22.92 65.62 Negative emotion, Anger Certainty Perceptual processes
  • 46. Phatic • Greeting – Statements of greetings to the broader Twitter community • Fourth wall – Textual equivalent of comments made directly to camera in television or cinema • Broadcast – Textual soliloquy, monologue and undirected statements of opinion • Unclassifiable – Unclassifiable strings of text
  • 47. Phatic Category N % Exemplar Phatic Action 30 1% *wanders through his twitter follower list, blocking all of the automated/spam follower accounts* Fourth wall 49 2% Note to self: Just because you're carrying tiny vials of hypercaffeine is no reason to start calculating remote delivery systems for them. Greeting 17 1% Good morning Twitterverse. How's the world outside? Unclassifiable 7 0% AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH Category N % Word Count Words/ Sentence >6 letters Dictionary Words Linguistic Inquiry Results Action 30 1% 456 22.80 26.75 75.22 Anxiety, hear, motion Fourthwall 49 2% 836 12.29 20.69 76.44 Negations, Quantifiers, Social processes, Humans, Affective processes, Causation, Exclusive Greeting 17 1% 208 7.70 29.33 78.37 Future tense, Positive emotion Relativity, time Unclassifiable 7 0% 6 3.00 33.33 33.33 NIL
  • 48. Phatic action fourthwall phatic unclassifiable
  • 49. Findings Non commercial Twitter classification Replicable across multiple accounts Heavy duty lifting Manual coding Qualitative research
  • 50. Implications Twitter • Consumption analysis • Consumer framework • Not always a business framework
  • 51. Future research The Public Timeline versus the Classification Scheme
  • 52. Questions stephen@stephendann.net Or @stephendann
  • 53. References Böhme, G (2006) Technical Gadgetry: Technological Development in the Aesthetic Economy, Thesis Eleven, 86 (1): 54-66 Cetina, K K 2009, What is a Pipe? bama and the Sociological Imagination, Theory, Culture & Society 2009 26(5): 129–140 Crawford, K (2009)'Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media',Continuum,23:4,525 — 535 Dudley, E 2009, Editorial: Lines of Communication, Journal of Librarianship and Information Science 2009; 41; 131-134 Ettama, J 2009 New media and new mechanisms of public accountability, Journalism 2009; 10; 319-321 Fahmi, W S 2009, Bloggers' street movement and the right to the city. (Re)claiming Cairo's real and virtual "spaces of freedom", Environment and Urbanization 2009; 21; 89-107 Galer-Unti, R 2009, Guerilla Advocacy: Using Aggressive Marketing Techniques for Health Policy Change, Health Promotion Practice, 10; 325-327 Gay, P Plait, P, Raddick, J, Cain, F and Lakdawalla, E (2009) "Live Casting: Bringing Astronomy to the Masses in Real Time", CAP Journal, June 26-29 Henneburg, S. Scammell, M and O'Shaughnessy, N (2009) Political marketing management and theories of democracy, Marketing Theory 2009; 9; 165-188 Honeycutt, C and Herring, S C (2009) Beyond Microblogging: Conversation and Collaboration via Twitter, (2009). Proceedings of the Forty-Second Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-42). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press. 1-10, http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/honeycutt.herring.2009.pdf Jansen, B, Zhang, M, Sobel, K and Chowdury, A (2009) Twitter power: Tweets as electronic word of mouth, Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60(11):2169–2188, 2009 http://ist.psu.edu/faculty_pages/jjansen/academic/jansen_twitter_electronic_word_of_mouth.pdf Java, A, Song, X, Finin, T and Tseng, B (2007) Why We Twitter: Understanding Microblogging Usage and Communities, Joint 9th WEBKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop ’07 , August 12, 2007, p 56-65
  • 54. References Krishnamurthy, B, Gill, P and Arlitt, M (2008) A Few Chirps About Twitter, WOSN'08, August 18, 2008, 19-24 Lariscy, R Avery, E J, Sweetser, K and Howes, P 2009 An examination of the role of online social media in journalists’ source mix, Public Relations Review 35 (2009) 314–316 Macintosh, A 2009, The emergence of digital governance, Significance, December, 176-178 Naaman, M, Boase, J and Lai, C-H (2010) Is it Really About Me? Message Content in Social Awareness Streams, CSCW 2010, February 6–10 Parslow, G, 2009, Commentary: Twitter for Educational Networking, BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 255–256, 2009 Pear Analytics (2009) Twitter Study – August 2009, http://www.pearanalytics.com/wp- content/uploads/2009/08/Twitter-Study-August-2009.pdf Power, R and Forte, D 2008, War & Peace in Cyberspace: Don’t twitter away your organisation’s secrets, Computer Fraud and Security, August, 18-20 Zhao, D and Rosson, M B, How and Why People Twitter: The Role that Micro-blogging Plays in Informal Communication at Work, GROUP’04, May 10–13, 2009, 243-252
  • 55. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Australia License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.5/au/