Skip to main content

Are Twitter Users Equal in Predicting Elections? A Study of User Groups in Predicting 2012 U.S. Republican Presidential Primaries

  • Conference paper
Book cover Social Informatics (SocInfo 2012)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 7710))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Existing studies on predicting election results are under the assumption that all the users should be treated equally. However, recent work [14] shows that social media users from different groups (e.g., “silent majority” vs. “vocal minority”) have significant differences in the generated content and tweeting behavior. The effect of these differences on predicting election results has not been exploited yet. In this paper, we study the spectrum of Twitter users who participate in the on-line discussion of 2012 U.S. Republican Presidential Primaries, and examine the predictive power of different user groups (e.g., highly engaged users vs. lowly engaged users, right-leaning users vs. left-leaning users) against Super Tuesday primaries in 10 states. The insights gained in this study can shed light on improving the social media based prediction from the user sampling perspective and more.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asur, S., Huberman, B.A.: Predicting the future with social media. Arxiv preprint arXiv:1003.5699 (2010), http://arxiv.org/abs/1003.5699

  2. Bermingham, A., Smeaton, A.F.: On using Twitter to monitor political sentiment and predict election results. In: Proceedings of the Sentiment Analysis where AI meets Psychology Workshop at IJCNLP (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bollen, J., Mao, H., Zeng, X.: Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational Science (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chen, L., Wang, W., Nagarajan, M., Wang, S., Sheth, A.P.: Extracting Diverse Sentiment Expressions with Target-dependent Polarity from Twitter. In: Proceedings of ICWSM (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Conover, M.D., Gonçalves, B., Ratkiewicz, J., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: Predicting the political alignment of twitter users. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd International Confernece on Social Computing, pp. 192–199 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Conover, M.D., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Goncalves, B., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: Political polarization on twitter. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp. 89–96 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Gayo-Avello, D.: I Wanted to Predict Elections with Twitter and all I got was this Lousy Paper. Arxiv preprint arXiv:1204.6441 (2012), http://arxiv.org/abs/1204.6441

  8. Gayo-Avello, D.: Don’t turn social media into another ’Literary Digest’ poll. Communications of the ACM 54(10), 121–128 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gilbert, E., Karahalios, K.: Widespread worry and the stock market. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp. 229–247 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Golbeck, J., Hansen, D.: Computing political preference among twitter followers. In: Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1105–1108 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Livne, A., Simmons, M.P., Adar, E., Adamic, L.A.: The party is over here: Structure and content in the 2010 election. In: Proceedings of ICWSM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Metaxas, P.T., Mustafaraj, E., Gayo-Avello, D.: How (Not) to predict elections. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd International Confernece on Social Computing, pp. 165–171 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mishne, G., Glance, N.: Predicting movie sales from blogger sentiment. In: AAAI Symposium on Computational Approaches to Analysing Weblogs (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Mustafaraj, E., Finn, S., Whitlock, C., Metaxas, P.T.: Vocal minority versus silent majority: Discovering the opionions of the long tail. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 3rd International Confernece on Social Computing, pp. 103–110 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  15. O’Connor, B., Balasubramanyan, R., Routledge, B.R., Smith, N.A.: From tweets to polls: Linking text sentiment to public opinion time series. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp. 122–129 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sang, E.T.K., Bos, J.: Predicting the 2011 Dutch Senate Election Results with Twitter. In: Proceedings of SASN 2012, the EACL 2012 Workshop on Semantic Analysis in Social Networks, pp. 53–60 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T.O., Sandner, P.G., Welpe, I.M.: Predicting elections with twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. In: Proceedings of ICWSM, pp. 178–185 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Zhang, X., Fuehres, H., Gloor, P.A.: Predicting Stock Market Indicators Through Twitter ’I hope it is not as bad as I fear’. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 26, 55–62 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chen, L., Wang, W., Sheth, A.P. (2012). Are Twitter Users Equal in Predicting Elections? A Study of User Groups in Predicting 2012 U.S. Republican Presidential Primaries. In: Aberer, K., Flache, A., Jager, W., Liu, L., Tang, J., Guéret, C. (eds) Social Informatics. SocInfo 2012. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 7710. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35386-4_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-35386-4_28

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-35385-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-35386-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics