The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Enabled backchannel: conference Twitter use by digital humanists
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: To date, few studies have been undertaken to make explicit how microblogging technologies are used by and can benefit scholars. This paper aims to investigate the use of Twitter by an academic community in various conference settings, and to pose the following questions: Does the use of a Twitter‐enabled backchannel enhance the conference experience, collaboration and the co‐construction of knowledge? and How is microblogging used within academic conferences, and can one articulate the benefits it may bring to a discipline? Design/methodology/approach: This paper considers the use of Twitter as a digital backchannel by the Digital Humanities (DH) community, taking as its focus postings to Twitter during three different international 2009 conferences. The resulting archive of 4,574 “Tweets” was analysed using various quantitative and qualitative methods, including a qualitative categorisation of Twitter posts by open coded analysis, a quantitative examination of user conventions, and text analysis tools. Prominent Tweeters were identified and a small qualitative survey was undertaken to ascertain individuals' attitudes towards a Twitter‐enabled backchannel. Findings: Conference hashtagged Twitter activity does not constitute a single distributed conversation, but rather multiple monologues with a few intermittent, discontinuous, loosely joined dialogues between users. The digital backchannel constitutes a multidirectional complex space in which the users make notes, share resources, hold discussions and ask questions as well as establishing a clear individual online presence. The use of Twitter as a conference platform enables the community to expand communication and participation in events amongst its members. The analysis revealed the close‐knit nature of the DH researcher community, which may be somewhat intimidating for those new to the field or conference. Practical implications: This study has indicated that, given that Twitter is becoming increasingly important for academic communities, new, dedicated methodologies for the analysis and understanding of Tweet‐based corpora are necessary. Routinely used textual analysis tools cannot be applied to corpora of Tweets in a straightforward manner, due to the creative and fragmentary nature of language used within microblogging. In this paper, a method has been suggested to categorise Tweets using open coded analysis to facilitate understanding of Tweet‐based corpora, which could be adopted elsewhere. Originality/value: This paper is the first known exhaustive study that concentrates on how microblogging technologies such as Twitter are used by and can benefit scholars. This data set both provides a valuable insight into the prevalence of a variety of Twitter practices within the constraints of a conference setting, and highlights the need for methodologies to be developed to analyse social media streams such as Twitter feeds. It also provides a bibliography of other research into microblogging.
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
The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research.
Wagner, H. R., Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1968) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2575405 · Cited by 46,361
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
(1998) · Sage eBooks · Cited by 38,631
(1999) · Cited by 28,356
Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity
Wenger, E. (1998) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511803932 · Cited by 23,500
(2006) · Cited by 18,730
Basics of Qualitative Research
Ozanne, J. L., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172751 · Cited by 17,850
Social network sites: definition, history, and scholarship
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x · Cited by 16,251
Basics of Qualitative Research (3rd ed.): Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008) · SAGE · doi:10.4135/9781452230153 · Cited by 12,136
Cultivating Communities of Practice: A Guide to Managing Knowledge
Wenger, É., & Snyder, W. M. (2002) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 4,762
Cited by
Looking for Information: A Survey of Research on Information Seeking, Needs, and Behavior
(2016) · Studies in Information · doi:10.1108/s2055-53772016 · Cited by 1,540
Gao, F., Luo, T., & Zhang, K. (2012) · British Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01357.x · Cited by 364
Disciplinary differences in Twitter scholarly communication
Holmberg, K., & Thelwall, M. (2014) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1229-3 · Cited by 289
Public microblogging on climate change: One year of Twitter worldwide
Kirilenko, A. P., & Stepchenkova, S. O. (2014) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.008 · Cited by 254
Working Together Apart: Collaboration over the Internet
Olson, J. S., & Olson, G. M. (2014) · Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics · doi:10.2200/s00542ed1v01y201310hci020 · Cited by 95
Metadata
- Authors
- Ross, C., Terras, M., Warwick, C., & Welsh, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Documentation
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2011-03-08
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 214-237
- ISSN
- 0022-0418 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2122682621
- Cited by
- 294
- References
- 44
- FWCI
- 393.40
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: Enabled backchannel: conference Twitter use by digital humanists. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/00220411111109449
- The paper
- Ross, C., Terras, M., Warwick, C., & Welsh, A. (2011). Enabled backchannel: conference Twitter use by digital humanists. Journal of Documentation. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111109449
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.