Spatiotemporal Analysis on Sentiments and Retweet Patterns of Tweets for Disasters

  • Sijing Chen
  • Jin MaoEmail author
  • Gang Li
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11420)


Twitter provides an important channel for public to share feelings, attitudes and concerns about disasters. In this study, we aim to explore how spatiotemporal factors affect people’s sentiment in disaster situations and how the area type, time stage and sentiment of the tweets affect the extent and speed of tweets’ diffusion. After analyzing 531,912 geo-tagged tweets about Hurricane Harvey, we found that on-site tweets are more positive than off-site tweets across the time; neutral tweets spread broader and faster than tweets with sentiment propensity; on-site tweets and tweets posted at early stages tend to be more popular. These findings could enable authorities and response organizations to better comprehend people’s feelings and behaviors in social media and their changes over time and space. In future, we will analyze the influence of the interactions among sentiment, location and time to retweet patterns.


Disaster Sentiment analysis Retweet pattern 



The paper is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 71790612, No. 71804135 and No. 71603189).


  1. 1.
    Imran, M., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., et al.: Processing social media messages in mass emergency: a survey. ACM Comput. Surv. (CSUR) 47(4), 67 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cobo, A., Parra, D., Navón, J.: Identifying relevant messages in a twitter-based citizen channel for natural disaster situations. In: Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, pp. 1189–1194 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vieweg, S.E.: Situational awareness in mass emergency: a behavioral and linguistic analysis of microblogged communications. University of Colorado at Boulder (2012)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boyd D., Golder S., Lotan G.: Tweet, tweet, retweet: conversational aspects of retweeting on twitter. In: Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Suh, B., Hong, L., Pirolli, P., Chi, E.H.: Want to be retweeted? Large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in twitter network. In: Proceedings of IEEE Second International Conference on Social Computing, pp. 177–184 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pervin, N., Takeda, H., Toriumi, F.: Factors affecting retweetability: an event-centric analysis on Twitter. In: Proceedings of Thirty Fifth International Conference on Information Systems, pp. 1–10 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhang, L., Xu, L., Zhang, W.: Social media as amplification station: factors that influence the speed of online public response to health emergencies. Asian J. Commun. 27(3), 322–338 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Neppalli, V.K., Caragea, C., Squicciarini, A., et al.: Sentiment analysis during Hurricane Sandy in emergency response. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 21, 213–222 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Phillips, M.E.: Hurricane Harvey Twitter Dataset. Accessed 22 Nov 2017
  10. 10.
    Kryvasheyeu, Y., Chen, H., Moro, E., et al.: Performance of social network sensors during Hurricane Sandy. PLoS ONE 10(2), e117288 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Texas Hurricane Harvey (DR-4332). Accessed 5 Mar 2018
  12. 12.
    Louisiana Tropical Storm Harvey (DR-4345). Accessed 5 Mar 2018
  13. 13.
    Powell, J.W.: An introduction to the natural history of disaster. University of Maryland: Disaster Research Project (1954)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kogan, M., Palen, L., Anderson, K.M.: Think local, retweet global: retweeting by the geographically-vulnerable during Hurricane Sandy. In: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, pp. 981–993 (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ozturk, N., Ayvaz, S.: Sentiment analysis on Twitter: a text mining approach to the Syrian refugee crisis. Telemat. Inform. 35(1), 136–147 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., et al.: Sentiment strength detection in short informal text. J. Am. Soc. Inform. Sci. Technol. 61(12), 2544–2558 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., Paltoglou, G., et al.: Sentiment in Twitter events. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 63(1), 163–173 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    SentiStrength. Accessed 20 Mar 2018
  19. 19.
    Tsugawa, S., Ohsaki, H.: Negative messages spread rapidly and widely on social media. In: Proceedings of the 2015 ACM on Conference on Online Social Networks, pp. 151–160 (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gaspar, R., Pedro, C., Panagiotopoulos, P., et al.: Beyond positive or negative: qualitative sentiment analysis of social media reactions to unexpected stressful events. Comput. Hum. Behav. 56, 179–191 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stieglitz, S., Dang-Xuan, L.: Emotions and information diffusion in social media—sentiment of microblogs and sharing behavior. J. Manag. Inf. Syst. 29(4), 217–248 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kryvasheyeu, Y., Chen, H., Obradovich, N., et al.: Rapid assessment of disaster damage using social media activity. Sci. Adv. 2(3), e1500779 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yoo, E., Rand, W., Eftekhar, M., et al.: Evaluating information diffusion speed and its determinants in social media networks during humanitarian crises. J. Oper. Manag. 45, 123–133 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wuhan UniversityWuhanChina

Personalised recommendations