Tweet, Tweet, Retweet: Conversational Aspects of Retweeting on Twitter
Abstract
Twitter - a microblogging service that enables users to post messages ("tweets") of up to 140 characters - supports a variety of communicative practices; participants use Twitter to converse with individuals, groups, and the public at large, so when conversations emerge, they are often experienced by broader audiences than just the interlocutors. This paper examines the practice of retweeting as a way by which participants can be "in a conversation." While retweeting has become a convention inside Twitter, participants retweet using different styles and for diverse reasons. We highlight how authorship, attribution, and communicative fidelity are negotiated in diverse ways. Using a series of case studies and empirical data, this paper maps out retweeting as a conversational practice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Twitter/X se ha consolidado como una fuente primordial de información noticiosa y de amplificación de contenidos.
“Además de ser una plataforma de conversación, Twitter/X se ha consolidado como una fuente primordial de información noticiosa y de amplificación de contenidos (Boyd, Golder & Lotan, 2010;Lotan et al., 2011).”
From Twitter/X en la campaña presidencial de 2021 en Ecuador: interacciones digitales y su proyección en la polarización política de las siguientes campañas (2025) · cites this paper as Boyd, Golder & Lotan, 2010
Cites
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 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience
Marwick, A. E., & boyd, D. (2011) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444810365313 · Cited by 4,612 · see citing works
Self-citationEmotions and Information Diffusion in Social Media—Sentiment of Microblogs and Sharing Behavior
Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222290408 · Cited by 1,604 · see citing works
Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries
Olteanu, A., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., & Kıcıman, E. (2019) · Frontiers in Big Data · doi:10.3389/fdata.2019.00013 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
“20 While the availability of large social datasets makes them suitable for quantitatively depicting behavior and populations, qualitative analyses are also used in social data research (boyd et al., 2010; Marwick, 2014; Tufekci, 2014), either alone or in conjunction with quantitative methods.”
MethodModeling Users' Activity on Twitter Networks: Validation of Dunbar's Number
Gonçalves, B., Perra, N., & Vespignani, A. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022656 · Cited by 638 · see citing works
Political Polarization on Twitter
Conover, M., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M., Goncalves, B., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126 · Cited by 626 · see citing works
“Retweets act as a form of endorsement, allowing individuals to rebroadcast content generated by other users, thereby raising the content's visibility (boyd, Golder, and Lotan 2008).”
BackgroundTheocharis, Y., Lowe, W., van Deth, J. W., & García-Albacete, G. (2015) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2014.948035 · Cited by 504 · see citing works
Chae, B. (. (2015) · International Journal of Production Economics · doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2014.12.037 · Cited by 481 · see citing works
(How) will the revolution be retweeted?: information diffusion and the 2011 Egyptian uprising
Starbird, K., & Palen, L. (2012) · Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work · doi:10.1145/2145204.2145212 · Cited by 409 · see citing works
Good Friends, Bad News - Affect and Virality in Twitter
Hansen, L. K., Arvidsson, A., Nielsen, F. A., Colleoni, E., & Etter, M. (2011) · Communications in Computer and Information Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-22309-9_5 · Cited by 361 · see citing works
Critical technocultural discourse analysis
Brock, A. (2018) · New Media & Society · doi:10.1177/1461444816677532 · Cited by 318 · see citing works
#Ferguson is everywhere: initiators in emerging counterpublic networks
Jackson, S. J., & Foucault Welles, B. (2016) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2015.1106571 · Cited by 276 · see citing works
Assessing the bias in samples of large online networks
González-Bailón, S., Wang, N., Rivero, A., Borge-Holthoefer, J., & Moreno, Y. (2014) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/j.socnet.2014.01.004 · Cited by 238 · see citing works
Social networks – the future for health care delivery
Griffiths, F., Cave, J., Boardman, F., Ren, J., Pawlikowska, T., Ball, R., Clarke, A., & Cohen, A. (2012) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2012.08.023 · Cited by 196 · see citing works
What Do Retweets Indicate? Results from User Survey and Meta-Review of Research
Metaxas, P., Mustafaraj, E., Wong, K., Zeng, L., O'Keefe, M., & Finn, S. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v9i1.14661 · Cited by 162 · see citing works
Seabrook, E. M., Kern, M. L., Fulcher, B. D., & Rickard, N. S. (2018) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.9267 · Cited by 144 · see citing works
Tampering with Twitter’s Sample API
Pfeffer, J., Mayer, K., & Morstatter, F. (2018) · EPJ Data Science · doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-018-0178-0 · Cited by 135 · see citing works
On the interpretation of digital trace data in communication and social computing research
Freelon, D. (2014) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1080/08838151.2013.875018 · Cited by 132 · see citing works
So, J., Prestin, A., Lee, L., Wang, Y., Yen, J., & Chou, W.-Y. S. (2016) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2014.940675 · Cited by 123 · see citing works
What makes cancer information viral on social media?
Wang, X., Chen, L., Shi, J., & Peng, T.-Q. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.024 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries
Olteanu, A., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., & Kiciman, E. (2016) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2886526 · Cited by 763 · see citing works
The Emergence of Conventions in Online Social Networks
Kooti, F., Yang, H., Cha, M., Gummadi, K., & Mason, W. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v6i1.14267 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Communication power struggles on social media: A case study of the 2011–12 Russian protests
Spaiser, V., Chadefaux, T., Donnay, K., Russmann, F., & Helbing, D. (2017) · Journal of Information Technology & Politics · doi:10.1080/19331681.2017.1308288 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
Ten simple rules for getting started on Twitter as a scientist.
Cheplygina, V., Hermans, F., Albers, C., Bielczyk, N., & Smeets, I. (2020) · PLOS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1007513 · Cited by 62 · see citing works
A taxonomy of value co-creation on Weibo – a communication perspective
Ge, J., & Gretzel, U. (2018) · International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management · doi:10.1108/ijchm-09-2016-0557 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Song, Y., Dai, X.-Y., & Wang, J. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.086 · Cited by 64 · see citing works
The Economy of the Digital Gift: From Socialism to Sociality Online
Romele, A., & Severo, M. (2016) · Theory, Culture & Society · doi:10.1177/0263276415619474 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Liang, H., & Fu, K.-W. (2015) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134270 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Guerrero-Solé, F., & Lopez-Gonzalez, H. (2019) · Social Science Computer Review · doi:10.1177/0894439317744163 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Darius, P. (2022) · Social Network Analysis and Mining · doi:10.1007/s13278-022-00958-w · Cited by 22 · see citing works
Luzuriaga Uribe, E., & Baquerizo-Neira, G. (2025) · Perspectivas de la comunicación · doi:10.56754/0718-4867.2025.3765
- Authors
- Boyd, D., Golder, S., & Lotan, G.
- Affiliations
- Microsoft (United States) (US)
- Cornell University (US)
- ORCID
- Boyd, D.
- Venue
- 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2010-01
- Pages
- 1-10
- ISSN
- 1530-1605 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2001653897
- Cited by
- 2,051
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 17 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 57 · 2023: 87 · 2022: 104 · 2021: 144 · 2020: 144 · 2019: 127 · 2018: 138 · 2017: 147 · 2016: 189 · 2015: 190 · 2014: 219 · 2013: 157 · 2012: 119
- FWCI
- 108.80
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Digital Communication and Language
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
- Keywords
- retweets, Twitter, microblogging, conversation, authorship, attribution, speaking activities, online communication
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
