Advertisement

Museums’ Tales: Visualizing Instagram Users’ Experience

  • Pierluigi VitaleEmail author
  • Azzurra Mancuso
  • Mariacristina Falco
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 96)

Abstract

Social networks have renewed the ways audiences experience art and its spaces. The phenomenon concerns visitors, communicating their art experience through social media, and the artistic institutions, communicating their spaces and events. Sharing contents is a practice of fruition that allows the experience to be textualized. Our research focuses on how Igers represent themselves and their experience at museums, through a qualitative and quantitative description of the data collected. Our approach can support art institutions’ communication strategies.

References

  1. 1.
    Alpers, G.W., Winzelberg, A.J., Classen, C., Roberts, H., Dev, P., Koopman, C., et al.: Evaluation of computerized text analysis in an Internet breast cancer support group. Comput. Hum. Behav. 21, 361–376 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bruns, A., Burgess, J.E.: The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. In: Proceedings of the 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR) General Conference (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cavnar, W.B., Trenkle, J.M.: N-gram-based text categorization. In: Proceedings of SDAIR-94, 3rd Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval, pp. 161–175 (1994)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cohn, M.A., Mehl, M.R., Pennebaker, J.W.: Linguistic indicators of psychological change after September 11, 2001. Psychol. Sci. 15(10), 687–693 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corbin, J., Strauss, A.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fruchterman, T.M., Reingold, E.M.: Graph drawing by force-directed placement. Softw.: Pract. Exp. 21(11), 1129–1164 (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giannoulakis, S., Tsapatsoulis, N.: Evaluating the descriptive power of Instagram hashtags. J. Innov. Digit. Ecosyst. 3(2), 114–129 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jakobson, R.: Essais de linguistique générale. Éditions de Minuit, Paris (1963)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kacewicz, E., Pennebaker, J.W., Davis, M., Jeon, M., Graesser, A.C.: Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 33(2), 125–143 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kahn, J.H., Tobin, R.M., Massey, A.E., Anderson, J.A.: Measuring emotional expression with the linguistic inquiry and word count. Am. J. Psychol. 120(2), 263–286 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Krippendorff, K.: Content analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kumar, E.: Natural Language Processing. I.K International Publishing House, New Delhi (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Manikonda, L., Meduri, V., Kambhampati, S.: Tweeting the mind and instagramming the heart: exploring differentiated content sharing on social media (2016)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Newman, M.L., Pennebaker, J.W., Berry, D.S., Richards, J.M.: Lying words: predicting deception from linguistic styles. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 29(5), 665–675 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pennebaker, J.W.: The Secret Life of Pronouns: What Our Words Say About Us. Bloomsbury, New York (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pennebaker, J.W., Chung, C.K., Frazee, J., Lavergne, G.M., Beaver, D.I.: When small words foretell academic success: the case of college admissions essays. PLoS One 9(12), e115844 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pezzini, I.: Semiotica dei nuovi musei. Laterza, Roma-Bari (2011)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Potter, W.J., Levine-Donnerstein, D.: Rethinking validity and reliability in content analysis. J. Appl. Commun. Res. 27(3), 258–284 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shneiderman, B., The eyes have it: a task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In: Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages, pp. 336–343 (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Semin, G.R., Fiedler, K.: The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: social cognition and language. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 54(4), 558 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tetlock, P.E.: The influence of self-presentation goals on attributional reports. Soc. Psychol. Q. 44, 300–311 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierluigi Vitale
    • 1
    Email author
  • Azzurra Mancuso
    • 1
  • Mariacristina Falco
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Political and Communication ScienceUniversity of SalernoFisciano, SalernoItaly

Personalised recommendations