[KSCI] Korea Science Citation Index Service

http://dx.doi.org/10.6109/jicce.2012.10.1.027

Analysis of Similarity of Twitter Topic Categories among Regions

Yun, Hong-Won (Department of Information Technology, Silla University)

Publication Information

Journal of information and communication convergence engineering / v.10, no.1, 2012 , pp. 27-32 More about this Journal

Abstract

Twitter can spread and share all kinds of information such as facts, opinions, and ideas in real time. In this paper, we empirically compare and analyze the topic categories in Twitter with all top 100 users in each of geographic region. We mainly consider the relationships among regions and selected four regions: Global, Seoul, Tokyo, and Beijing. Each of the top 100 users in Twitter is classified into a specific category and then statistical analysis is conducted. Among eight topic categories, the "Arts" category is the largest and the second is "Life". The correlation between global and Seoul groups has the lowest value among the six pairs of relationships between regional groups, and this difference is statistically significant. We find that the Seoul, Tokyo, and Beijing regional Twitter groups, all in East Asia, have high topical similarity. Based on the correlation analysis, Seoul and Tokyo saliently show a sticky trend. The correlation coefficient presents very a strong positive correlation between Seoul and Tokyo. The correlation between the global group and the East Asian groups is relatively lower than that among the East Asian groups.

Keywords

Twitter; Regional similarity; Topic category; Regional trend;

Citations & Related Records

Reference

1	Nathan Reed, Gigatweeter [Internet]. Available: http://gigatweeter.com/analytics.
2	J. L. Myers and A. D. Well, Research Design and Statistical Analysis, 2nd ed., Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2003.
3	J. S. Maritz, Distribution-free Statistical Methods, New York, NY: Chapman & Hall, 1981.
4	A. L. Hughes and L. Palen, "Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events," Proceedings of the 6th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference, Gothenburg, Sweden, 2009.
5	S. Vieweg, L. Palen, S. B. Liu, A. Hughes, and J. Sutton, "Collective intelligence in disaster: an examination of the phenomenon in the aftermath of the 2007 Virginia Tech Shootings," Proceedings of the 5th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management Conference, Washington: DC, 2008.
6	W. X. Zhao, J. Jiang, J. Weng, J. He, E. Lim, H. Yan, and X. Li, "Comparing Twitter and traditional media using topic model," Advances in Information Retrieval (Lecture Note in Computer Science, vol. 6611), pp. 338-349, 2011.
7	H. Kwak, H. Chun, and S. Moon, "Fragile online relationship: a first look at unfollow dynamics in Twitter," Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing System, Vancouver: BC, pp. 1091-1100, 2011.
8	J. Weng, E. Lim, J. Jiang, and Q. He, "TwitterRank: finding topicsensitive influential twitters," Proceedings of the third ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, New York: NY, pp. 261-270, 2010.
9	E. Fischer and A. R. Reuber, "Social interaction via new social media: (how) can interactions on Twitter affect effectual thinking and behavior," Journal of Business Venturing, vol. 26, no. 1. pp. 1-18, 2011. DOI ScienceOn
10	Twiter, Inc., Twitter Counter [Internet]. Available: http://twittercounter.com.
11	E. Bakshy, B. Karrer, and L. A. Adamic, "Social influence and the diffusion of user-created content," Proceedings of the 10th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce, Stanford: CA, pp. 325-334, 2009.
12	B. Suh, L. Hong, P. Pirolli, and E. H. Chi, "Want to be retweeted? large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in Twitter network," Proceedings of 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Social Computing, Minneapolis: MN, pp. 177-184, 2010.
13	E. Bakshy, J. M. Hofman, W. A. Mason, and D. J. Watts, "Everyone's an influencer: quantifying influence on Twitter," Proceedings of the 4th ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, Hong Kong, pp. 65-74, 2011.
14	R. D. Waters and J. Y. Jamal, "Tweet, tweet, tweet: a content analysis of nonprofit organizations' Twitter updates," Public Relations Review, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 321-324, 2011. DOI ScienceOn
15	J. J. Chen, R. Nairn, L. Nelson, M. Bernstein, and E. Chi, "Short and tweet: experiments on recommending content from information stream," Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Human Factors in Computing System, Atlanta: GA, pp. 1185-1194, 2010.
16	D. Zhao and M. B. Rosson, "How and why people Twitter: the role that micro-blogging plays in informal communication at work," Proceedings of the ACM 2009 International Conference on Supporting Group Work, New York: NY, pp. 243-252, 2009.
17	A. Java, X. Song, T. Finin, and B. Tseng, "Why we Twitter: an analysis of a microblogging community," Advances in Web Mining and Web Usage Analysis (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 5439), pp. 118-138, 2009.
18	B. McNely, "Backchannel persistence and collaborative meaning-making," Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication, Bloomington: IN, pp. 297-304, 2009.
19	C. Honeycutt and S. Herring, "Beyond microblogging: conversation and collaboration via Twitter," Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Big Island: HI, pp. 1-10, 2009.
20	J. Dixon and R. C. Tucker, "We use technology, but do we use technology? Using existing technologies to communicate, collaborate, and provide support," Proceedings of the 37th Annual ACM SIGUCCS Fall Conference on User Services Conference, New York: NY, pp. 309-312, 2009.
21	T. Sakaki, M. Okazaki, and Y. Matsuo, "Earthquake shake Twitter users: real-time event detection by social sensors," Proceedings of 19th annual International Conference on World Wide Web, Raleigh: NC, pp. 851-860, 2010.
22	K. Starbird, L. Palen, A. L. Hughes, and S. Vieweg, "Chatter on the red: what hazards threat reveals about the social life of microblogged information," Proceedings of the ACM 2010 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, New York: NY, pp. 241-250, 2010.