Cited by 133Computational and Text Analysis MethodsMedia and Digital CommunicationDigital Humanities and Scholarship

On the interpretation of digital trace data in communication and social computing research

Freelon, Deen·2014·Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media

Abstract

The widespread availability of analytical tools for Big Data offers enormous opportunities and challenges for communication researchers. In contrast to user-generated texts, digital trace data (evidence of online user activities such as hyperlinks and retweets) represent a new methodological frontier for the field. However, interpretive strategies remain scattered and ad hoc with few best practices to guide them. To help remedy this situation, this article reviews recent scholarship in both communication and social computing research that has incorporated three common types of trace data: hyperlinks, Twitter followers, and retweets. It finds that while researchers in both fields have interpreted each trace in a variety of ways, they have largely declined to explain the validity of their interpretations.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/08838151.2013.875018

Cites

74 of 74 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Norms are sensitive to context, as the meaning of the same action or mechanism may change under different circumstances.

    “Norms are also sensitive to context, as the meaning of the same action or mechanism may change under different circumstances”

    From Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries (2019) · cites this paper as Freelon, 2014

  • The assumption that online social traces reflect real-world phenomena has been challenged due to concerns with construct validity and stability over time.

    “However, this assumption has been challenged due to concerns with construct validity and stability over time (Freelon, 2014; Lazer, 2015).”

    From Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries (2019) · cites this paper as Freelon, 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 75 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Freelon, D.
Affiliations
American University (US)
Corresponding author
Freelon, Deen
Venue
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media
Published
2014-01-02
Volume
58
Issue
1
Pages
59-75
ISSN
  • 0883-8151 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-6878
OpenAlex
W2074336863
Cited by
132
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
52.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › General Social Sciences › Computational and Text Analysis Methods
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Digital Humanities and Scholarship
Keywords
digital traces, interpretive strategies, hyperlinks, Twitter followers, retweets, social computing, communication research methods, big data, validity of interpretation

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