Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Informationsverbreitung in sozialen Medien

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbuch Soziale Medien

Part of the book series: Springer Reference Sozialwissenschaften ((SRS))

Zusammenfassung

Die Weitergabe und Verbreitung von Informationen zählen zu den beliebtesten Aktivitäten in den sozialen Medien. Zahlreiche Nutzungsoptionen (z. B. Posting, Sharing, Retweeting, Reblogging) ermöglichen das schnelle Teilen von Neuigkeiten in unterschiedlichen Formaten. Dabei erfüllen Weitergabe und Verbreitung von Informationen für die User wichtige soziale und kommunikative Funktionen, die über den Kerneffekt der Informationsdiffusion häufig hinausgehen. In unserem Beitrag geben wir auf Basis aktueller Literatur einen Überblick über typische Erklärungsmodelle für Informationsdiffusion einerseits und beschreiben andererseits Motive für die Weitergabe und Verbreitung von Informationen in und mithilfe von sozialen Medien. Wir skizzieren zudem den Einfluss von Netzwerkstrukturen und Informationstypen auf und Barrieren bei der Informationsdiffusion.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
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 EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Aus Gründen der Lesbarkeit verwenden dieser Beitrag sowie alle anderen Beiträge im Handbuch ausschließlich die maskuline Form; es sind jedoch stets beide Geschlechter gemeint.

Literatur

  • Adamic, Lada, Lento Thomas, Eytan Adar, und Pauline Ng. 2014. The evolution of memes on Facebook. Facebook Data Science. https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-data-science/the-evolution-of-memes-on-facebook/10151988334203859.

  • Bakshy, Eytan, Itamar Rosenn, Cameron Marlow, und Lada A. Adamic. 2012. The role of social networks in information diffusion. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference on the World Wide Web (WWW ’12), 1–10. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/2187836.2187907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakshy, Eytan, Itamar Rosenn, Cameron Marlow, und Lada A. Adamic. 2012. The role of social networks in information diffusion. In Proceedings of the 21st international conference on the World Wide Web (WWW ’12), 1–10. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/2187836.2187907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakshy, Eytan, Solomon Messing, und Lada Adamic. 2015. Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 58(4): 707–731. doi:10.1126/science.aaa1160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastos, Marco Toledo, Cornelius Puschmann, und Rodrigo Travitzki. 2013. Tweeting across hashtags: Overlapping users and the importance of language, topics, and politics. In Proceedings of the 24th ACM conference on hypertext and social media (HT ’13), 164–168. New York: ACM Press. doi:10.1145/2481492.2481510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, Danah, Scott Golder, und Gilad Lotan. 2010. Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 43rd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, 1–10. Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2010.412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruns, Axel. 2008. Blogs, Wikipedia, Second life, and beyond: From production to produsage. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carey, James W. 1989. Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, Justin, Lada A. Adamic, P. Alex Dow, Jon Kleinberg, und Jure Leskovec. 2014. Can cascades be predicted? In Proceedings of the 23rd international World Wide Web conference (WWW ’14), Hrsg. Wonjae Lee, Hae-Chang Rim und Daniel Schwabe, 1–11. Seoul: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/2566486.2567997.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, Hichang, Michael Stefanone, und Geri Gay. 2002. Social information sharing in a CSCL community. In Proceedings of the conference on computer support for collaborative learning (CSCL ’02), 43–51. Morristown: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/1658616.1658623.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constant, David, Sara Kiesler, und Lee Sproull. 1994. What’s mine is ours, or is it? A study of attitudes about information sharing. Information Systems Research 5(4): 400–421. doi:10.1287/isre.5.4.400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cover, Thomas M., und Joy A. Thomas. 1991. Elements of information theory. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Coviello, Lorenzo, Yunkyu Sohn, Adam D. I. Kramer, Cameron Marlow, Massimo Franceschetti, Nicholas A. Christakis, und James H. Fowler. 2014. Detecting emotional contagion in massive social networks. PLoS ONE 9(3): 1–6. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0090315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrara, Emilio, Onur Varol, Filippo Menczer, und Alessandro Flammini. 2013. Traveling trends: Social butterflies or frequent fliers? In ACM conference on online social networks (COSN), 213–222. New York: ACM. doi: 10.1145/2512938.2512956.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaffney, Devin, und Cornelius Puschmann. 2012. Game or measurement? Algorithmic transparency and the Klout score. In #influence12: Symposium & workshop on measuring influence on social media, 1–2. Nova Scotia Halifax: Dalhousie University. http://www.socialmedialab.ca/influence12/submissions/influence12_submission_23.pdf.

  • Gillespie, Tarleton. 2014. The relevance of algorithms. In Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society, Hrsg. Tarleton Gillespie, Pablo Boczkowski und Kirsten Foot, 167–194. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, Mark. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology 78: 1360–1380. doi:10.1086/225469.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruhl, Daniel, David Liben-Nowell, Ramanathan Guha, und Andrew Tomkins. 2004. Information diffusion through Blogspace. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 6(2): 43–52. doi:10.1145/1046456.1046462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, Stephen, Tim Highfield, und Axel Bruns. 2013. More than a backchannel: Twitter and television. Participations: Journal of Audience & Reception Studies 10(1): 405–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Himelboim, Itai, Stephen McCreery, und Marc Smith. 2013. Birds of a feather tweet together: Integrating network and content analyses to examine cross-ideology exposure on Twitter. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 18(2): 154–174. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmberg, Kim. 2012. Online information ripples. A conceptual model for analyzing information dissemination patterns in social media. In Proceedings Der 2. DGI-Konferenz, 64. Jahrestagung Der Deutschen Gesellschaft Für Informationswissenschaft, Hrsg. Marlies Ockenfeld, Isabella Peters und Katrin Weller, 11–18. Frankfurt a. M.: DGI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Lichan, Gregorio Convertino, und Ed H. Chi. 2011. Language matters in Twitter: A large scale study characterizing the top languages in Twitter characterizing differences across languages including URLs and hashtags. In Proceedings of the fifth international AAAI conference on weblogs and social media (ICWSM ’11), 518–521. Menlo Park: The AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iyengar, Raghuram, Christophe Van den Bulte, und Thomas W. Valente. 2011. Opinion leadership and social contagion in new product diffusion. Marketing Science 30(2): 195–212. doi:10.1287/mksc.1100.0566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Java, Akshay, Xiaodan Song, Tim Finin, und Belle Tseng. 2007. Why we Twitter: Understanding microblogging usage and communities. In Proceedings of the 9th WebKDD and 1st SNA-KDD 2007 workshop on web mining and social network analysis, 56–65. San Jose: ACM. doi: 10.1145/1348549.1348556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries, Adrianne. 2014. You’re not going to read this. But you’ll probably share it anyway. The Verge. http://www.theverge.com/2014/2/14/5411934/youre-not-going-to-read-this.

  • Jenkins, Henry, Xiaochang Li, und Ana Domb Krauskopf. 2008. If it doesn’t spread, it’s dead: Creating value in a spreadable marketplace. Cambridge, MA: Convergence Culture Consortium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knobel, Michele, und Colin Lankshear. 2007. Online memes, affinities, and cultural production. In A new literacies sampler, 199–227. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kollock, Peter. 1999. The economies of online cooperation: Gifts and public goods in cyberspace. In Communities in cyberspace, Hrsg. Marc Smith und Peter Kollock, 219–237. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kwak, Haewoon, Changhyun Lee, Hosung Park, und Sue Moon. 2010. What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? Categories and subject descriptors. In Proceedings of the 19th international conference on the World Wide Web (WWW ’10), Hrsg. Juliana Freire und Soumen Chakrabarti, 591–600. Raleigh: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazer, David, und Allan Friedman. 2005. The parable of the hare and the tortoise: Small worlds, diversity, and system performance. Faculty research working papers series. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.832627.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leavitt, Alex. 2014. From #followfriday to YOLO: Exploring the cultural salience of Twitter memes. In Twitter and society, Hrsg. Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt und Cornelius Puschmann, 137–154. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Chei Sian, und Long Ma. 2012. News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Computers in Human Behavior 28(2): 331–339. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2011.10.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linde, Frank, und Wolfgang G. Stock. 2011. Information markets: A strategic guideline for the I-commerce. Berlin/New York: De Gruyter Saur.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Matsubara, Yasuko, Yasushi Sakurai, B. Aditya Prakash, Lei Li, und Christos Faloutsos. 2012. Rise and fall patterns of information diffusion. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining – KDD ’12, 6. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/2339530.2339537.

    Google Scholar 

  • McPherson, Miller, Lynn Smith-Lovin, und James M. Cook. 2001. Bird of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology 27(2001): 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mowbray, Miranda 2014. Automated twitter accounts. In Twitter and Society, Hrsg. Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt und Cornelius Puschmann, S. 183–194. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naaman, Mor, Jeffrey Boase, und Chih-hui Lai. 2010. Is it really about me? Message content in social awareness streams. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW ’10), Hrsg. Steve Whittaker und Elizabeth F. Churchill, 189–192. Savannah: ACM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pariser, Eli. 2012. The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. New York: Penguin.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Paßmann, Johannes, Thomas Boeschoten, und Mirko Tobias Schäfer. 2014. The gift of the gab: Retweet cartels and gift economies on Twitter. In Twitter and society, Hrsg. Katrin Weller, Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Merja Mahrt und Cornelius Puschmann, 331–344. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rheingold, Howard. 1993. The virtual community. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, Everett M. 2003. Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sandvig, Christian. 2015. The Facebook ‚it’s not our fault‘ study. Social Media Collective Research Blog. http://www.socialmediacollective.org/2015/05/07/the-facebook-its-not-our-fault-study/.

  • Seely Brown, John, und Paul Duguid. 2000. The social Life of information. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shannon, Claude E., und Warren Weaver. 1949. The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shifman, Limor 2012. An anatomy of a YouTube meme. New Media & Society 14(2): 187–203. doi:10.1177/1461444811412160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Marc A., Lee Rainie, Itai Himelboim, und Ben Shneiderman. 2014. Mapping Twitter topic networks: From polarized crowds to community clusters. Washington. Pew Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stattner, Erick, und Nicolas Vidot. 2011. Social network analysis in epidemiology: Current trends and perspectives. In Fifth IEEE international conference on research challenges in information science (RCIS), Hrsg. Martine Collard und Robert Teller, 1–11. Le Gosier: IEEE. doi: 10.1109/RCIS.2011.6006866.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talja, Sanna. 2002. Information sharing in academic communities: Types and levels of collaboration in information seeking and use. New Review of Information Behaviour Research 3(2002): 143–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, Stanley, und Katherine Faust. 1994. Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, Duncan J., und Peter Sheridan Dodds. 2007. Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research 34(4): 441–458. doi:10.1086/518527.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watts, Duncan J., und Steven H. Strogatz. 1998. Collective dynamics of ‚small-world‘ networks. Nature 393(4): 440–442. doi:10.1038/30918.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • WebhostingBuzz. 2013. Who’s sharing what – The state of social sharing in 2013. http://www.webhostingbuzz.com/blog/2013/03/21/whos-sharing-what/.

  • Weng, Jianshu, Ee-peng Lim, Jing Jiang, und Qi He. 2010. Twitter rank: Finding topic-sensitive influential twitterers. In ACM international conference on web search and data mining (WSDM 2010), 261–270. New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/1718487.1718520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Shaomei, Jake M. Hofman, Winter A. Mason, und Duncan J. Watts. 2011. Who says what to whom on Twitter. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World Wide Web – WWW ’11 (2011), 705–714. doi: 10.1145/1963405.1963504.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hans-Bredow-Institut für Medienforschung, Hamburg, Deutschland

    Cornelius Puschmann

  2. ZBW Deutsche Zentralbibliothek für Wirtschaftswissenschaften, Leibniz-Informationszentrum Wirtschaft & Christian-Abrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Kiel, Deutschland

    Isabella Peters

Authors
  1. Cornelius Puschmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isabella Peters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cornelius Puschmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Hans-Bredow-Inst. für Medienforschung Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Jan-Hinrik Schmidt

  2. Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany

    Monika Taddicken

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Puschmann, C., Peters, I. (2017). Informationsverbreitung in sozialen Medien. In: Schmidt, JH., Taddicken, M. (eds) Handbuch Soziale Medien. Springer Reference Sozialwissenschaften. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03765-9_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-03765-9_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-03764-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-03765-9

  • eBook Packages: Social Science and Law (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation