Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining

2018 Edition
| Editors: Reda Alhajj, Jon Rokne

Combining Online Social Networks with Text Analysis

  • Jana DiesnerEmail author
  • Chieh-Li Chin
  • Marc A. Smith
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-7131-2_328
  • 43 Downloads

Synonyms

Glossary

Clustering

The process of partitioning networks into substructures or groups of dense or similar nodes

Semantic network

Structured representations of knowledge that are used for reasoning and inference (Sowa 1992)

Social network

Consists of nodes representing social agents and links representing connections between social agents

Definition

Network representations of online interactions between social agents, such as individuals, groups, and organizations, can be combined with, enhanced with, or built based upon the content of information and communication shared by network participants.

Introduction

Social media platforms and social networking sites have been developing rapidly and are being adopted widely (Van Dijck 2013). These systems allow people to interact, e.g., to socialize or collaborate with each other, to broadcast user generated content, and to share professionally generated content, among other...

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

References

  1. Aggarwal CC (2014) Mining text and social streams: a review. SIGKDD Explor Newsl 15(2):9–19.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2641190.2641194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aragon C, Hutto C, Echenique A, Fiore-Gartland B, Huang Y, Kim J, Neff G, Xing W, Bayer J (2016) Developing a research agenda for human-centered data science. In: Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing companion, 2016. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), New York, pp 529–535Google Scholar
  3. Berelson B (1952) Content analysis in communication research. Foundations of communications research. Free Press, GlencoeGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernard HR, Ryan G (1998) Text analysis: qualitative and quantitative methods. In: Bernard H (ed) Handbook of methods in cultural anthropology. Altamire Press, Walnut Creek, pp 595–646Google Scholar
  5. Boellstorff T, Nardi B, Pearce C, Taylor TL (2012) Ethnography and virtual worlds: a handbook of method. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  6. Bourdieu P, Thompson JB (1991) Language and symbolic power. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  7. boyd d, Crawford K (2012) Critical questions for big data: provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Inf Commun Soc 15(5):662–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bruckman A, Karahalios K, Kraut RE, Poole ES, Thomas JC, Yardi S (2010) Revisiting research ethics in the facebook era: challenges in emerging CSCW research. In: Proceedings from conference on computer supported cooperative work (CSCW 2010), Savannah, 2010Google Scholar
  9. Burrows R, Savage M (2014) After the crisis? Big data and the methodological challenges of empirical sociology. Big Data Soc 1(1).  https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714540280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carley KM (1997) Network text analysis: the network position of concepts. In: Text analysis for the social sciences: methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, pp 79–100Google Scholar
  11. Chang J, Boyd-Graber J, Blei DM (2009) Connections between the lines: augmenting social networks with text. In: 15th ACM SIGKDD international conference, Paris, France, 2009. ACM, New York, pp 169–178Google Scholar
  12. Chu Z, Gianvecchio S, Wang H, Jajodia S (2010) Who is tweeting on Twitter: human, bot, or cyborg? In: Proceedings of the 26th annual computer security applications conference, 2010. ACM, New York, pp 21–30Google Scholar
  13. Clauset A, Newman MEJ, Moore C (2004) Finding community structure in very large networks. Phys Rev E 70(6):066111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Corman SR, Kuhn T, McPhee RD, Dooley KJ (2002) Studying complex discursive systems. Hum Commun Res 28(2):157–206Google Scholar
  15. Danowski JA (1993) Network analysis of message content. In: Richards WD, Barnett GA (eds) Progress in communication sciences, vol 12. Ablex, Norwood, pp 197–221Google Scholar
  16. De Choudhury M, Mason WA, Hofman JM, Watts DJ (2010) Inferring relevant social networks from interpersonal communication. In: Proceedings of the 19th international conference on World Wide Web, 2010. ACM, New York, pp 301–310Google Scholar
  17. Deerwester S, Dumais ST, Furnas GW, Landauer TK, Harshman R (1990) Indexing by latent semantic analysis. J Am Soc Inf Sci 41(6):391–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Diesner J, Carley KM (2005) Revealing social structure from texts: meta-matrix text analysis as a novel method for network text analysis. In: Narayanan VK, Armstrong DJ (eds) Causal mapping for information systems and technology research: approaches, advances, and illustrations. Idea Group Publishing, Harrisburg, pp 81–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Diesner J, Carley KM (2010) A methodology for integrating network theory and topic modeling and its application to innovation diffusion. In: IEEE international conference on social computing (SocComp), 2010. IEEE, Minneapolis, pp 687–692Google Scholar
  20. Diesner J, Chin C-L (2015) Usable ethics: practical considerations for responsibly conducting research with social trace data. Paper presented at the beyond IRBs: ethical review processes for big data research, Washington, DC, 10 Dec 2015Google Scholar
  21. Ferrara E, Varol O, Davis C, Menczer F, Flammini A (2016) The rise of social bots. Commun ACM 59(7):96–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gee JP (2014) An introduction to discourse analysis: theory and method. Routledge, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. Gillespie T (2010) The politics of ‘platforms’. New Media Soc 12(3):347–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Gloor PA, Zhao Y (2006) Analyzing actors and their discussion topics by semantic social network analysis. In: 10th IEEE international conference on information visualization, London, 2006. IEEE, pp 130–135Google Scholar
  26. González-Bailón S, Wang N, Rivero A, Borge-Holthoefer J, Moreno Y (2014) Assessing the bias in samples of large online networks. Soc Networks 38:16–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Griffiths TL, Steyvers M, Tenenbaum JB (2007) Topics in semantic representation. Psychol Rev 114(2):211–244CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hansen D, Shneiderman B, Smith MA (2010) Analyzing social media networks with NodeXL: insights from a connected world. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam/BostonGoogle Scholar
  29. Hargittai E (2015) Is bigger always better? Potential biases of big data derived from social network sites. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 659(1):63–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Himelboim I, Smith MA, Rainie L, Shneiderman B, Espina C (2017) Classifying twitter topic-networks using social network analysis. Soc Media + Soc 3(1).  https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305117691545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hu M, Liu B (2004) Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In: ACM SIGKDD international conference on knowledge discovery & data mining (KDD-2004), Washington, 2004. ACM, New York, pp 168–177Google Scholar
  32. Johnstone B (2008) Discourse analysis. Blackwell, MaldenGoogle Scholar
  33. Jurafsky D, Martin JH (2014) Speech and language processing, 2nd edn. Pearson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Kirchner C, Mohr JW (2010) Meanings and relations: an introduction to the study of language, discourse and networks. Poetics 38(6):555–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kosinski M, Matz SC, Gosling SD, Popov V, Stillwell D (2015) Facebook as a research tool for the social sciences: opportunities, challenges, ethical considerations, and practical guidelines. Am Psychol 70(6):543–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kraut R, Olson J, Banaji M, Bruckman A, Cohen J, Couper M (2004) Psychological research online: report of Board of Scientific Affairs’ Advisory Group on the conduct of research on the Internet. Am Psychol 59(2):105–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Krippendorff K (2004) Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology. Sage, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  38. Lazer D, Pentland AS, Adamic L, Aral S, Barabasi AL, Brewer D, Christakis N, Contractor N, Fowler J, Gutmann M (2009) Life in the network: the coming age of computational social science. Science 323(5915):721–723CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Liu B, Hu M, Cheng J (2005) Opinion observer: analyzing and comparing opinions on the web. In: 14th international World Wide Web conference (WWW2005), Chiba, Japan, 2005. ACM, New York, pp 342–351Google Scholar
  40. Manning CD, Schütze H (1999) Foundations of statistical natural language processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. McCallum A, Wang X, Mohanty N (2007) Joint group and topic discovery from relations and text. In: Statistical network analysis: models, issues, and new directions. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 4503. Springer, Berlin/New York, pp 28–44Google Scholar
  42. Mihalcea RF, Radev DR (2011) Graph-based natural language processing and information retrieval. Cambridge University Press, New YorkzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Milroy J, Milroy L (1985) Linguistic change, social network and speaker innovation1. J linguis 21(2):339–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Monge PR, Contractor NS (2003) Theories of communication networks. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. Paltridge B (2012) Discourse analysis: an introduction. Bloomsbury Publishing, London/New YorkGoogle Scholar
  46. Pang B, Lee L (2008) Opinion mining and sentiment analysis, vol 2. Foundatioens and trends in information retrieval. Now Publishers, Breda.  https://doi.org/10.1561/1500000001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Polonetsky J, Tene O, Jerome J (2015) Beyond the common rule: ethical structures for data research in non-academic settings. Colorado Technol Law J 13(2):333–368Google Scholar
  48. Roberts CW (1997) Text analysis for the social sciences: methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, MahwahGoogle Scholar
  49. Roth C, Cointet J-P (2010) Social and semantic coevolution in knowledge networks. Soc Networks 32(1):16–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Ruths D, Pfeffer J (2014) Social media for large studies of behavior. Science 346(6213):1063–1064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Saint-Charles J, Mongeau P (2017) Social influence and discourse similarity networks in workgroups. Soc Netw 52:228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Shanahan JG, Qu Y, Wiebe JM (2006) Computing attitude and affect in text: theory and applications. The information retrieval series. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Smith MA, Himelboim I, Rainie L, Shneiderman B (2015) The structures of twitter crowds and conversations. In: Matei SA, Russell MG, Bertino E (eds) Transparency in social media: tools, methods and algorithms for mediating online interactions. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 67–108.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18552-1_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sowa JF (1992) Semantic networks. In: Shapiro SC (ed) Encyclopedia of artificial intelligence, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York, pp 1493–1511Google Scholar
  55. Van Dijck J (2013) The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media. Oxford University Press, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zevenbergen B, Mittelstadt B, Véliz C, Detweiler C, Cath C, Savulescu J, Whittaker M (2015) Philosophy meets internet engineering: ethics in networked systems research (GTC workshop outcomes paper). Oxford Internet Institute, University of OxfordGoogle Scholar
  57. Zimmer M (2010) “But the data is already public”: on the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics Inf Technol 12(4):313–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Information SciencesUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-ChampaignChampaignUSA
  2. 2.Social Media Research FoundationRedwood CityUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • H. Ulrich Hoppe
    • 1
  • James Caverlee
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Applied Cognitive ScienceUniversity of Duisburg-EssenDuisburgGermany
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringTexas A&M UniversityCollege StationUSA