The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Social media use in disaster recovery: A systematic literature review
Open accessAbstract
Studies on the role of social media in disaster management have so far focused mainly on early phases of the disaster response process. Published evidence regarding the scope and effectiveness of social media use in the recovery phase is limited but promising. There is currently no study that provides a comprehensive picture of the current research landscape that can inform different groups who need to capitalise on social media for disaster recovery. The present study aims to address this research gap by conducting a systematic literature review of social media use in disaster recovery. The review analyses the relevant studies to identify any temporal variations in research activity, the social media platforms most frequently used in disaster recovery, their patterns of use by type of disaster as well as the geographical locations where the studies have focused. Importantly, the paper identifies and summarises research findings relating to social media use in various aspects of disaster recovery, including (1) donations and financial support, (2) solidarity and social cohesion, (3) post-disaster reconstruction and infrastructure services, (4) socioeconomic and physical wellbeing, (5) information support, (6) mental health and emotional support, and (7) business & economic activities. We envisage that this comprehensive review will support the disaster risk reduction community with the requisite knowledge to better explore social media for disaster recovery. Similarly, future research may find the study helpful for understanding the state of knowledge and identifying research gaps around social media use for disaster recovery.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Houston, J. B., Hawthorne, J., Perreault, M. F., Park, E. H., Goldstein Hode, M., Halliwell, M. R., Turner McGowen, S. E., Davis, R., Vaid, S., McElderry, J. A., et al. (2015) · Disasters · doi:10.1111/disa.12092 · Cited by 869
Psychosocial Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Large-scale Quasi-Experimental Study on Social Media
Saha, K., Torous, J., Caine, E. D., & De Choudhury, M. (2020) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/22600 · Cited by 166
A novel surveillance approach for disaster mental health
Gruebner, O., Lowe, S. R., Sykora, M., Shankardass, K., Subramanian, S. V., & Galea, S. (2017) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181233 · Cited by 105
The ripple of fear, sympathy and solidarity during the Boston bombings
Lin, Y.-R., & Margolin, D. (2014) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-014-0031-z · Cited by 72
Ng, L., Pitt, V., Huckvale, K., Clavisi, O., Turner, T., Gruen, R., & Elliott, J. H. (2014) · Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-121 · Cited by 38
Cited by
Öztürk, G., & Canlı, S. (2026) · Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness · doi:10.1017/dmp.2026.10386
Metadata
- Authors
- Ogie, R. I., James, S., Moore, A., Dilworth, T., Amirghasemi, M., & Whittaker, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-02
- Volume
- 70
- Pages
- 102783
- ISSN
- 2212-4209 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4205116593
- Cited by
- 169
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 5.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Social media use in disaster recovery: A systematic literature review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102783
- The paper
- Ogie, R. I., James, S., Moore, A., Dilworth, T., Amirghasemi, M., & Whittaker, J. (2022). Social media use in disaster recovery: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102783
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.