Skip to main content
Log in

Crisis information distribution on Twitter: a content analysis of tweets during Hurricane Sandy

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Natural Hazards Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social media has been widely used for crisis communication during disasters, and its use during extreme events has drawn attention from both researchers and practitioners. Although crisis information coverage and distribution speed are important issues, both have not been studied extensively in the literature. This paper fills this gap by studying information distribution and coverage of social media during disasters. To this end, we searched and analyzed 986,579 tweets posted during Hurricane Sandy (October 22 to November 6, 2012). To learn about responses from official agents, we sampled 163 governmental organizations (GO), 31 non-governmental organizations (NGO) and 276 news agent accounts and their tweets for analysis. Specifically, five social media key performance indicators (KPIs) are studied in this paper, including impression, like, mention, re-tweet, and response time, and other variables such as hashtag, tweet frequency, and information type. We also test whether the five KPIs and other variables are different among different user types. Results show that total impression, re-tweet rate, hashtag, and tweet frequency are significantly \((P<0.05)\) different among different user types. Specifically, although news agent users generate a larger number of total impressions and tweet more frequently than GO and NGO users, their re-tweet rates and number of hashtags are lower than the GO and NGO users. Re-tweet rate based on mentioned users (5%) is significantly higher \((P=0.00)\) than that based on regular followers (0.01%). Nearly 89% of total impressions are generated from regular followers, with impressions from re-tweeting being a minority. This paper provides some new insights into how social media was used for crisis communication during disasters.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Abedin B, Babar A, Abbasi A (2014) Characterization of the use of social media in natural disasters: a systematic review. In: 2014 IEEE fourth international conference on big data and cloud computing (BdCloud), Sydney, NSW, pp 449–454

  • Acar A, Muraki Y (2011) Twitter for crisis communication: lessons learned from Japan’s tsunami disaster. Int J Web Based Communities 7(3):392–402

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander DE (2014) Social media in disaster risk reduction and crisis management. Sci Eng Ethics 20(3):717–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Saggaf Y, Simmons P (2015) Social media in Saudi Arabia: exploring its use during two natural disasters. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 95:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabási A-L (2009) Scale-free networks: a decade and beyond. Science 325(5939):412–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barbier G, Zafarani R, Gao H, Fung G, Liu H (2012) Maximizing benefits from crowdsourced data. Comput Math Organ Theory 18(3):257–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg BL, Lune H, Lune H (2004) Qualitative research methods for the social sciences, 5th edn. Pearson, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Berger J, Milkman KL (2012) What makes online content viral? J Mark Res 49(2):192–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blake ES, Kimberlain TB, Berg RJ, John CP, Beven II JL (2012) Tropical cyclone report: Hurricane Sandy (AL182012), 22–29, Technical report. National Hurricane Center, Miami, FL, USA, p 2013

  • Bruns A, Burgess J (2014) Crisis communication in natural disasters : the queensland floods and christchurch earthquakes. In: Weller K, Bruns A, Burgess J, Mahrt M, Puschmann C (eds) Twitter and society, digital formations. Peter Lang, New York, pp 373–384

    Google Scholar 

  • Castillo C, Mendoza M, Poblete B (2011) Information credibility on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on world wide web, WWW’11, New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 675–684

  • Clifton B (2012) Advanced web metrics with Google analytics, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • De Wever B, Schellens T, Valcke M, Van Keer H (2006) Content analysis schemes to analyze transcripts of online asynchronous discussion groups: a review. Comput Educ 46(1):6–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • di Tada N, Large T (2010) Information system to assist survivors of disasters. In: 2010 4th IEEE international conference on digital ecosystems and technologies (DEST), pp 354–359

  • Fraustino JD, Liu B, Jin Y (2012) Social media use during disasters: a review of the knowledge base and gaps. Technical report, National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism [START]

  • Friggeri A, Adamic LA, Eckles D, Cheng J (2014) Rumor cascades. In: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on weblogs and social media, pp 101–110

  • Gupta A, Kumaraguru P (2012) Credibility ranking of tweets during high impact events. In: Proceedings of the 1st workshop on privacy and security in online social media, PSOSM’12, New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 2:2–2:8

  • Ha S, Ahn JH (2011) Why are you sharing others tweets?: The impact of argument quality and source credibility on information sharing behavior. In: ICIS 2011 Proceedings

  • Houston JB, Hawthorne J, Perreault MF, Park EH, Hode MG, Halliwell MR, Turner McGowen SE, Davis R, Vaid S, McElderry JA, Griffith SA (2015) Social media and disasters: a functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters 39(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang C-M, Chan E, Hyder AA (2010) Web 2.0 and internet social networking: a new tool for disaster management?—lessons from Taiwan. BMC Med Inf Decis Mak 10(1):1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huberman BA, Romero DM, Wu F (2009) Social networks that matter: twitter under the microscope. First Monday 4(1). http://rstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2317/2063

  • Humanity Road (2012) [image] from goes-east satellite on Oct. 25. https://twitter.com/HumanityRoad/status/261479343308537856

  • Jaeger PT, Shneiderman B, Fleischmann KR, Preece J, Yan Q, Philip Fei W (2007) Community response grids: e-government, social networks, and effective emergency management. Telecommun Policy 31(1011):592–604

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kostka J, Oswald YA, Wattenhofer R (2008) Word of mouth: rumor dissemination in social networks. In: Shvartsman AA, Felber P (eds) Structural information and communication complexity. Springer, Berlin, pp 185–196

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Li H, Sakamoto Y (2015) Re-tweet count matters: social influences on sharing of disaster-related tweets. J Homel Secur Emerg Manag 12(3):737–761

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindsay BR (2011) Social media and disasters: current uses, future options, and policy considerations. Technical report, Washington, DC, USA

  • Lundgren RE, McMakin AH (2013) Risk communication: a handbook for communicating environmental, safety, and health risks, 5th edn. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy JF, Boyd DM (2005) Digital backchannels in shared physical spaces: experiences at an academic conference. In: CHI’05 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems, CHI EA’05, New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 1641–1644

  • Muralidharan S, Rasmussen L, Patterson D, Shin J-H (2011) Hope for Haiti: an analysis of Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts. Public Relat Rev 37(2):175–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • (1979) Comprehensive emergency management: a governor’s guide. Department of Defense, Defense Civil Preparedness Agency, Washington

  • Neuendorf KA (1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd edn. SAGE, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuendorf KA (2002) The content analysis guidebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Okada A, Ogura K (2014) Japanese disaster management system: recent developments in information flow and chains of command. J Conting Crisis Manag 22(1):58–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmenter D (2015) Key performance indicators: developing, implementing, and using winning KPIs, 3rd edn. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rimstad R, Njå O, Rake EL, Braut GS (2014) Incident command and information flows in a large-scale emergency operation. J Conting Crisis Manag 22(1):29–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson CD, Brown DE (2005) First responder information flow simulation: a tool for technology assessment. In: Proceedings of the 37th conference on winter simulation, winter simulation conference, WSC ’05, pp 919–925

  • Rourke L, Anderson T (2004) Validity in quantitative content analysis. Educ Technol Res Develop 52(1):5–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sena A, Corvalan C, Ebi K (2014) Climate change, extreme weather and climate events, and health impacts. In: Freedman B (ed) Global environmental change. Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 605–613

    Google Scholar 

  • Shan L, Regan A, De Brun A, Barnett J, van der Sanden MCA, Wall P, McConnon A (2014) Food crisis coverage by social and traditional media: a case study of the 2008 Irish dioxin crisis. Public Underst Sci 23(8):911–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuai X, Ding Y, Busemeyer J (2012) Multiple spreaders affect the indirect influence on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on world wide web, WWW’12 Companion, New York, NY, USA, ACM, pp 597–598

  • Spence PR, Lachlan KA, Lin X, del Greco M (2015) Variability in twitter content across the stages of a natural disaster: implications for crisis communication. Commun Q 63(2):171–186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Takahashi B, Tandoc EC Jr, Carmichael C (2015) Communicating on Twitter during a disaster: an analysis of tweets during typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines. Comput Human Behav 50:392–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Twitter Help Center (2017a) FAQs about retweets (RT). https://support.twitter.com/articles/77606

  • Twitter Help Center (2017b) What are replies and mentions? https://support.twitter.com/articles/14023

  • Twitter Support Center (2017) Tweet activity dashboard. https://support.twitter.com/articles/20171990

  • Vieweg S, Hughes AL, Starbird K, Palen L (2010) Microblogging during two natural hazards events: what twitter may contribute to situational awareness. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human hactors in computing systems, ACM, pp 1079–1088

  • White C, Plotnick L, Kushma J, Hiltz SR, Turoff M (2009) An online social network for emergency management. Int J Emerg Manag 6(3–4):369–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams R, Williams G, Burton D (2012) The use of social media for disaster recovery. University of Missouri Extension, Joplin

    Google Scholar 

  • Yates D, Paquette S (2011) Emergency knowledge management and social media technologies: a case study of the 2010 Haitian earthquake. Int J Inf Manag 31(1):6–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yuan W, Guan D, Huh E-N, Lee S (2013) Harness human sensor networks for situational awareness in disaster reliefs: a survey. IETE Tech Rev 30(3):240–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang G, Yang Y, Mao X (2011) Disaster recovery evaluation PROC model framework based on information flow. In: IEEE 2011 International conference on computer science and network technology (ICCSNT), vol 3. pp 1841–1845

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun Zhuang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wang, B., Zhuang, J. Crisis information distribution on Twitter: a content analysis of tweets during Hurricane Sandy. Nat Hazards 89, 161–181 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2960-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-017-2960-x

Keywords

Navigation