A Study of Measurement of Audience in Social Networks

  • Mohammed Al-MaitahEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 880)


This article is dedicated to surveying and analyzing Facebook account performance and developing a set of indicators, which can describe audience of Facebook user. The raw experimental data was gathered and analyzed using statistical methods, developed initially for Twitter. Based on them audience was classified into categories then main attributes of updates was carefully studied to develop derived indicators which can show not only audience quality, but also information coverage and partly influence (e.g. growth of authority and so on) and demonstrated using graphical charts. Indicators were generalized into formulae—so was built a base to further studies on Facebook account activity. Directions of future work are also listed in conclusion.


Social network Performance Facebook Influence Account survey 


  1. 1.
    Benevenuto, F., Rodrigues, T., Cha, M., Almeida, V.: Characterizing user behavior in online social networks. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, New York, USA, pp. 49–62 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Golliher, S.: How I reverse engineered klout score. Online journal by Sean Golliher.
  3. 3.
    Stevenson, S.: What your klout score really means wired. Accessed Apr 2012
  4. 4.
    Drula, G.: Social and online media research—data, metrics and methods. Rev. Appl. Socio Econ. Res. 3, 77–86 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Haewoon, K., Changhyun, L., Hosung, P., Sue, M.: What is Twitter, a social network or a news media. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, New York, USA, pp. 591–600 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kempe, D., Kleinberg, J., Tardos, E.: Maximizing the spread of influence through a social network. Theory Comput. Open Access J. 11, 105–147 (2015)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ruixu, G.: Research on information spreading model of social network. In: Second International Conference on Instrumentation and Measurement, Computer, Communication and Control, Beijing, China, pp. 918–920 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tang, J.: Computational models for social network analysis. A brief survey. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion, Perth, Australia, pp. 921–925 (2017)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jingbo, M., Lourdes, M., Amanda, H., Minwoong, C., Jeff, C.: Research on social networking sites and social support from 2004 to 2015: a narrative review and directions for future research. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 20(1), 44–51 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Newman, M.E.J., Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Random graph models of social networks. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., Gummadi, K.P.: Measuring user influence in Twitter: the million follower fallacy. In: Proceedings of the 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM), ICWSM 2010 on Weblogs and Social, Washington DC, USA, pp. 10–17 (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Jaitne, M., Kantola, H.: Countering threats: a comprehensive model for utilization of social media for security and law enforcement authorities. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Cyberwarfare and Security, Greece, pp. 102–109 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ronzhyn, A.: The use of Facebook and Twitter during the 2013–2014 protests in Ukraine. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Social Media, University of Brighton, UK, pp. 442–448 (2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Facebook Estimates from 5.5 to 11.2 accounts are fake. The Next Web.
  16. 16.
    Veerasamy, N., Labuschagne, W.: Determining trust factors of social networking sites. In: Proceedings of 12th European Conference on Information Warfare and Security, Finland, pp. 288–297 (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sirivianos, M, Cao, Q., Yang, X., Pregueiro, T.: Aiding the detection of fake accounts in large scale social online services. In: Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Conference on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX Association Berkeley, CA, USA, pp. 15–15 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cook, D.: Identity multipliers and the mistaken Twittering of birds of feather. In: Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Cyberwarfare and Security, Greece, pp. 42–48 (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science Department, Community CollegeKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations