skip to main content
10.1145/3524458.3547268acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesgooditConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

On Designing a Time Sensitive Interaction Graph to Identify Twitter Opinion Leaders

Published:07 September 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

What happened on social media during the recent pandemic? Who was the opinion leader of the conversations? Who influenced whom? Were they medical doctors, ordinary people, scientific experts? Did health institutions play an important role in informing and updating citizens? Identifying opinion leaders within social platforms is of particular importance and, in this paper, we introduce the idea of a time sensitive interaction graph to identify opinion leaders within Twitter conversations. To evaluate our proposal, we focused on all the tweets posted on Twitter in the period 2020-21 and we considered just the ones that were Italian-written and were related to COVID-19. After mapping these tweets into the graph, we applied the PageRank algorithm to extract the opinion leaders of these conversations. Results show that our approach is effective in identifying opinion leaders and therefore it might be used to monitor the role that specific accounts (i.e., health authorities, politicians, city administrators) have within specific conversations.

References

  1. Sarah Alqurashi, Abdulaziz Alashaikh, Mahmoud Nabil, Eisa Alanazi, Ahmed Sherif, and Waleed Alsmary. 2021. Identifying Information Superspreaders of COVID-19 from Arabic Tweets. In 2021 3rd IEEE Middle East and North Africa COMMunications Conference (MENACOMM). 109–114. https://doi.org/10.1109/MENACOMM50742.2021.9678304Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Onur Asan and Pascale Carayon. 2017. Human Factors of Health Information Technology—Challenges and Opportunities. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 33, 4(2017), 255–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2017.1282755Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Fabiola Bertolotti, Tommaso Fabbri, Federica Mandreoli, Riccardo Martoglia, and Annachiara Scapolan. 2020. Work datafication and digital work behavior analysis as a source of social good. In IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC). IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Armir Bujari, Marco Furini, and Nicolas Laina. 2017. On using cashtags to predict companies stock trends. In 2017 14th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications Networking Conference (CCNC). 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCNC.2017.7983075Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Roberta De Michele, Stefano Ferretti, and Marco Furini. 2019. On helping broadcasters to promote TV-shows through hashtags. Multimedia Tools and Applications 78, 3 (2019), 3279–3296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018-6510-7Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Roberta De Michele and Marco Furini. 2018. Smart City and Images: The Use of Image Hashtags to Get Insights on Citizens. In Smart Objects and Technologies for Social Good. 311–320.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Mark Dredze. 2012. How Social Media Will Change Public Health. IEEE Intelligent Systems 27, 4 (July 2012), 81–84. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2012.76Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Marcel Dunaiski, Jaco Geldenhuys, and Willem Visser. 2018. Author ranking evaluation at scale. Journal of Informetrics 12, 3 (2018), 679–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.06.004Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Tommaso Fabbri, Federica Mandreoli, Riccardo Martoglia, and Annachiara Scapolan. 2019. Employee attitudes and (digital) collaboration data: A preliminary analysis in the HRM field. In International Workshop on Social Media Sensing (SMS’19 @ IEEE ICCCN) (2019-08-05). IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Stefano Ferretti, Marco Furini, Claudio E. Palazzi, Marco Roccetti, and Paola Salomoni. 2010. WWW recycling for a better world. Commun. ACM 53, 4 (2010), 139–143. https://doi.org/10.1145/1721654.1721692Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Marco Furini. 2021. Identifying the features of ProVax and NoVax groups from social media conversations. Computers in Human Behavior 120 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106751Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Marco Furini and Emilia Flisi. 2022. Opinion Leaders and Twitter: Metric Proposal and Psycholinguistic Analysis. In IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Marco Furini, Federica Mandreoli, Riccardo Martoglia, and Manuela Montangero. 2017. The Use of Hashtags in the Promotion of Art Exhibitions. In Proc. 13th Italian Research Conference on Digital Libraries (IRCDL), Revised Selected Papers. 187–198.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Marco Furini, Federica Mandreoli, Riccardo Martoglia, and Manuela Montangero. 2018. Towards Tweet Content Suggestions for Museum Media Managers. In Proc. of GOODTECHS18. Association for Computing Machinery, 265–270.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Marco Furini, Federica Mandreoli, Riccardo Martoglia, and Manuela Montangero. 2022. A Predictive Method to Improve the Effectiveness of Twitter Communication in a Cultural Heritage Scenario. J. Comput. Cult. Herit. 15, 2, Article 21 (apr 2022), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3470786Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Marco Furini and Gabriele Menegoni. 2018. Public Health and Social Media: Language Analysis of Vaccine Conversations. In 2018 International Workshop on Social Sensing (SocialSens). 50–55. https://doi.org/10.1109/SocialSens.2018.00022Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Andrew J. Grimes and Phillip K. Berger. 1970. Cosmopolitan-Local: Evaluation of the Construct. Administrative Science Quarterly(1970).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Somya Jain and Adwitiya Sinha. 2020. Identification of influential users on Twitter: A novel weighted correlated influence measure for Covid-19. Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 139 (2020), 110037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2020.110037Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. S. Mo Jang, Brooke W. Mckeever, Robert Mckeever, and Joon Kyoung Kim. 2019. From Social Media to Mainstream News: The Information Flow of the Vaccine-Autism Controversy in the US, Canada, and the UK. Health Communication 34, 1 (2019), 110–117. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2017.1384433Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Yanyan Li, Shaoqian Ma, Yonghe Zhang, Ronghuai Huang, and Kinshuk. 2013. An improved mix framework for opinion leader identification in online learning communities. Knowledge-Based Systems 43 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2013.01.005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Riccardo Martoglia and Manuela Montangero. 2020. An Intelligent Dashboard for Assisted Tweet Composition in the Cultural Heritage Area (Work-in-progress). In Proc. of GOODTECHS20. Association for Computing Machinery, 226–229.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Manuela Montangero and Marco Furini. 2015. TRank: Ranking Twitter users according to specific topics. In 2015 12th Annual IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC). 767–772. https://doi.org/10.1109/CCNC.2015.7158074Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Marcella Tambuscio, Giancarlo Ruffo, Alessandro Flammini, and Filippo Menczer. 2015. Fact-checking Effect on Viral Hoaxes: A Model of Misinformation Spread in Social Networks. In 24th WWW Conference (Florence, Italy). 6 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2740908.2742572Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Zainab Tariq Soomro, Sardar Haider Waseem Ilyas, and Ussama Yaqub. 2020. Sentiment, Count and Cases: Analysis of Twitter discussions during COVID-19 Pandemic. In 2020 7th International Conference on Behavioural and Social Computing (BESC). 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1109/BESC51023.2020.9348291Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Ryen W. White and Eric Horvitz. 2009. Cyberchondria: Studies of the Escalation of Medical Concerns in Web Search. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst. 27, 4 (Nov. 2009), 23:1–23:37. https://doi.org/10.1145/1629096.1629101Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Zeynep Zengin Alp and Şule Gündüz Öğüdücü. 2018. Identifying topical influencers on twitter based on user behavior and network topology. Knowledge-Based Systems 141 (2018), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.11.021Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    GoodIT '22: Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Conference on Information Technology for Social Good
    September 2022
    436 pages
    ISBN:9781450392846
    DOI:10.1145/3524458

    Copyright © 2022 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 7 September 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Upcoming Conference

    GoodIT '24
  • Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)137
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)17

    Other Metrics

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format