skip to main content
10.1145/2808797.2809376acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

Actions Are Louder than Words in Social Media

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 August 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

We study the relationship between the level of chatter on a social medium (like Twitter) and the level of the observed actions related to the chatter. For example, in a disaster, how does relief-donation chatter on Twitter correlate with the dollar amount received? One hypothesis is that a fraction of those who act will also tweet about it, which implies linear scaling, action ∝ chatter. On the other hand, if there is a contagion effect (those who tweet about donation incite others to donate) and these incited donors tend to be "quiet" and not broadcast their actions, then we expect superlinear scaling,

action ∝ chatterγ

where γ > 1. We show, using a simple model, that the degree sequence of the social media "follower" network plays a key role in determining the scaling exponent γ. For random graphs and power-law graphs, the scaling exponent is at or near 2 (quadratic amplification). We empirically validate the model's predictions using location-paired donation and social media data from U.S. states after Hurricane Sandy. Understanding the scaling behavior that relates social-media chatter to real physical actions is an important step for estimating the extent of a response and for determining social-media strategies to affect the response.

References

  1. J. Holguín-Veras, M. Jaller, L. N. Van Wassenhove, N. Pérez, and T. Wachtendorf, "On the unique features of post-disaster humanitarian logistics," J. Operations Management, vol. 30, no. 7, pp. 494--506, 2012.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. A. Doyle, G. Katz, K. Summers, C. Ackermann, I. Zavorin, Z. Lim, S. Muthiah, P. Butler, N. Self, L. Zhao, C.-T. Lu, R. P. Khandpur, Y. Fayed, and N. Ramakrishnan, "Forecasting significant societal events using the Embers streaming predictive analytics system," Big Data, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 185--195, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. D. Cosley, D. P. Huttenlocher, J. M. Kleinberg, X. Lan, and S. Suri, "Sequential influence models in social networks." AAAI Int. Conf. on Weblogs and Social Media, vol. 10, pp. 26--33, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. D. M. Romero, W. Galuba, S. Asur, and B. A. Huberman, "Influence and passivity in social media," in Proc. ECML/PKDD, 2011, pp. 18--33. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Y.-K. Lee and C.-T. Chang, "Who gives what to charity? Characteristics affecting donation behavior," Social Behavior and Personality, vol. 35, no. 9, pp. 1173--1180, 2007.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. R. Bekkers and P. Wiepking, "A literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving," Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. C. Torrey, M. Burke, M. Lee, A. Dey, S. Fussell, and S. Kiesler, "Connected giving: Ordinary people coordinating disaster relief on the Internet," in Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Destro and J. Holguín-Veras, "Material convergence and its determinants," Transportation Rsrch. Rec., vol. 2234, no. 1, pp. 14--21, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. A. Muller and G. Whiteman, "Exploring the geography of corporate philanthropic disaster response: A study of Fortune Global 500 firms," J. Business Ethics, vol. 84, no. 4, pp. 589--603, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. L. Palen and S. B. Liu, "Citizen communications in crisis: Anticipating a future of ICT-supported public participation," in Proc. SIGCHI. ACM, 2007, pp. 727--736. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. K. Starbird and L. Palen, "(How) will the revolution be retweeted? Information diffusion and the 2011 Egyptian uprising," in Proc. ACM CSCW. ACM, 2012, pp. 7--16. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Y. Tyshchuk, H. Li, H. Ji, and W. A. Wallace, "Evolution of communities on twitter and the role of their leaders during emergencies," in Proc. ASONAM, pp. 727--733. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. K. Starbird and L. Palen, "Voluntweeters: Self-organizing by digital volunteers in times of crisis," in Proc. SIGCHI, 2011, pp. 1071--1080. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. C. Hagar, "Crisis informatics: Perspectives of trust--is social media a mixed blessing?" SLIS Student Research J., vol. 2, no. 2, p. 2, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. S. Cook, C. Conrad, A. L. Fowlkes, and M. H. Mohebbi, "Assessing Google flu trends performance in the United States during the 2009 Influenza virus A (H1N1) pandemic," PLoS one, vol. 6, no. 8, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. W. B. Arthur, "Competing technologies, increasing returns, and lock-in by historical events," The Economic Journal, pp. 116--131, 1989.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. S. Bikhchandani, D. Hirshleifer, and I. Welch, "Learning from the behavior of others: Conformity, fads, and informational cascades," The Journal of Economic Perspectives, pp. 151--170, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. S. Eubank, H. Guclu, V. A. Kumar, M. V. Marathe, A. Srinivasan, Z. Toroczkai, and N. Wang, "Modelling disease outbreaks in realistic urban social networks," Nature, vol. 429, no. 6988, pp. 180--184, 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. J. Leskovec, A. Singh, and J. Kleinberg, "Patterns of influence in a recommendation network," in Advances in KDD, 2006, pp. 380--389. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. S. Adali, F. Sisenda, and M. Magdon-Ismail, "Actions speak as loud as words: Predicting relationships from social behavior data," in Proc. WWW, 2012, pp. 689--698. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. P. Domingos and M. Richardson, "Mining the network value of customers," in Proc. KDD, 2001, pp. 57--66. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. D. Kempe, J. Kleinberg, and É. Tardos, "Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network," in Proc. KDD, 2003, pp. 137--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. E. Anshelevich, A. Hate, and M. Magdon-Ismail, "Seeding influential nodes in non-submodular models of information diffusion," in Proc. AAMAS, 2013, pp. 1305--1306. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. D. J. Watts, "A simple model of global cascades on random networks," PNAS, vol. 99, no. 9, pp. 5766--5771, 2002.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. S. Wu, J. M. Hofman, W. A. Mason, and D. J. Watts, "Who says what to whom on Twitter," in Proc. WWW. ACM, 2011, pp. 705--714. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. D. d. S. Price, "A general theory of bibliometric and other cumulative advantage processes," JASIST, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 292--306, 1976.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert, "Emergence of scaling in random networks," Science, vol. 286, no. 5439, pp. 509--512, 1999.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. N. Li and G. Chen, "Analysis of a location-based social network," in IEEE Intl. Conf. on Comp. Sci. and Engg., vol. 4, 2009, pp. 263--270. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. S. Scellato and C. Mascolo, "Measuring user activity on an online location-based social network," in INFOCOM Workshops. IEEE, 2011, pp. 918--923.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. C.-C. Chang and C.-J. Lin, "LIBSVM: A library for Support Vector Machines," ACM TIST, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 27.1--27.27, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. S. Kumar, F. Morstatter, and H. Liu, Twitter Data Analytics. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2014. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. M. Dredze, M. Paul, S. Bergsma, and H. Tran, "Carmen: A Twitter geolocation system with applications to public health," in HIAI Workshop (at AAAI'13), 2013, pp. 20--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. The Foundation Center, "Philanthropy & Hurricane Sandy. A Report on the Foundation and Corporate Response." 2014. {Online}. Available: http://foundationcenter.org/gainknowledge/research/pdf/sandy_philanthropy_2014.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Actions Are Louder than Words in Social Media

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        ASONAM '15: Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining 2015
        August 2015
        835 pages
        ISBN:9781450338547
        DOI:10.1145/2808797

        Copyright © 2015 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 25 August 2015

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Overall Acceptance Rate116of549submissions,21%

        Upcoming Conference

        KDD '24

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader