skip to main content
10.1145/3197026.3197057acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesjcdlConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Digital History meets Microblogging: Analyzing Collective Memories in Twitter

Published:23 May 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Having good knowledge and comprehension of history is believed to be important for a variety of reasons. Microblogging platforms could offer good opportunities to study how and when people explicitly refer to the past, in which context such references appear and what purpose they serve. However, this area remains unexplored. In this paper we report the results of a large scale exploratory analysis of history-focused references in microblogs based on 11-months long snapshot of Twitter data. We are the first to analyze general historical references in Twitter based on large scale data analysis. The results of this study can be used for designing content recommendation systems and could help to improve time aware search applications.

References

  1. R. P. Abelson and A. Levi. 1985. Decision Making and Decision Theory, Handbook of Social Psychology. 231--309.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. C.-m. Au Yeung and A. Jatowt. 2011. Studying How the Past is Remembered: Towards Computational History Through Large Scale Text Mining. CIKM '11, Glasgow, Scotland, UK, 1231--1240. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. S. Auer, C. Bizer, G. Kobilarov, J. Lehmann, R. Cyganiak, and Z. Ives. 2007. DBpedia: A Nucleus for a Web of Open Data. ISWC'07/ASWC'07, Busan, Korea, 722--735. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. R. Campos, G. Dias, A. M. Jorge, and A. Jatowt. 2015. Survey of temporal information retrieval and related applications. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 47, 2 (2015), 15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. F. Clavert, B. Majerus, and N. BeauprÃl. {n. d.}. #ww1. Twitter, the Centenary of the First World War and the Historian.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. J. Cook, A. D. Sarma, A. Fabrikant, and A. Tomkins. 2012. Your Two Weeks of Fame and Your Grandmother's. WWW '12, Lyon, France, 919--928. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. H. Ebbinghaus. 1913. Memory: A Contribution to Experimental Psychology.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. M. Ferron and P. Massa. 2011. Collective Memory Building in Wikipedia: The Case of North African Uprisings. WikiSym '11, Mountain View, California, USA, 114--123. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. R. G.-Gavilanes, A. Mollgaard, M. Tsvetkova, and T. Yasseri. 2017. The memory remains: Understanding collective memory in the digital age. Science Advances 3, 4 (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. T. Gilovich. 1981. Seeing the Past in the Present: The Effect of Associations to Familiar Events on Judgments and Decisions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40, 5 (1981), 797.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. M. Halbwachs. 1950. La Memoire Collective. Les Presses universitaires de France, (in French).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. C. Hoerl and T. McCormack. 2001. Time and Memory: Issues in Philosophy and Psychology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. J. Hoffart, S. Seufert, D. B. Nguyen, M. Theobald, and G. Weikum. 2012. KORE: Keyphrase Overlap Relatedness for Entity Disambiguation. CIKM '12, Maui, Hawaii, USA, 545--554. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. R. Jacoby. 1997. Social Amnesia: A Critique of Contemporary Psychology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A. Jatowt, D. Kawai, and K. Tanaka. 2016. Digital History Meets Wikipedia: Analyzing Historical Persons in Wikipedia. JCDL '16, Newark, New Jersey, USA, 17--26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. N. Kanhabua, T. N. Nguyen, and C. Niederée. 2014. What Triggers Human Remembering of Events?: A Large-scale Analysis of Catalysts for Collective Memory in Wikipedia. JCDL '14, London, United Kingdom, 341--350. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Kanhabua, C. Nieder, and W. Siberski. 2013. Towards Concise Preservation by Managed Forgetting: Research Issues and Case Study. iPres'13, Lisbon, Portugal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. E. Kuzey, J. Strötgen, V. Setty, and G. Weikum. 2016. Temponym Tagging: Temporal Scopes for Textual Phrases. WWW '16 Companion, Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland, 841--842. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Tumasjan, T. O. Sprenger, P. G. Sandner, and I. M. Welpe. 2010. Predicting Elections with Twitter: What 140 Characters Reveal about Political Sentiment. ICWSM'10, Washington, DC, USA.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Digital History meets Microblogging: Analyzing Collective Memories in Twitter

          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
            JCDL '18: Proceedings of the 18th ACM/IEEE on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries
            May 2018
            453 pages
            ISBN:9781450351782
            DOI:10.1145/3197026

            Copyright © 2018 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: 23 May 2018

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            JCDL '18 Paper Acceptance Rate26of71submissions,37%Overall Acceptance Rate415of1,482submissions,28%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader