The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Second Screen and Participation: A Content Analysis on a Full Season Dataset of Tweets
Abstract
The practice of using a “second screen” while following a television program is quickly becoming a widespread phenomenon. When the secondary device is used for comments about programs, most discussions take place on popular social media such as Facebook and Twitter. Previous research pointed out the value of these conversations in understanding the behavior of “networked publics.” Building upon this background, this article presents the first study on a complete dataset of tweets (2,489,669) that span an entire season of a TV genre (1,076 episodes of talk shows). A content analysis of the tweets created during the season's most engaging moments indicates a relationship between typology of broadcasted scenes, style of comments, and the way participation (audience and political) is played.
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
Uses and Gratifications Research
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973) · Public Opinion Quarterly · doi:10.1086/268109 · Cited by 4,012
On the Use of the Mass Media for Important Things
Katz, E., Haas, H., & Gurevitch, M. (1973) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2094393 · Cited by 1,639
Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0056 · Cited by 1,577 · cited 1×
“Journal of Communication 64 (2014) 260–277 © 2014 International Communication Association 263 Most literature about the U&G application to social media studies social relationships and self-representation dynamics (Eastin & LaRose, 2005; Park, Kee, & Valenzuela, 2009; Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008).”
BackgroundThe Role of Theory in Uses and Gratifications Studies
Blumler, J. G. (1979) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/009365027900600102 · Cited by 904 · cited 3×
“…and Na compared two datasets of tweets retrieved respectively during the airtime of President Obama’s Nobel Prize speech and an episode of the talent show So You Think You Can Dance (2011) using a code matrix framed in uses and gratifications theory (Blumler, 1979; Katz, Gurevitch, & Haas, 1973).”
MethodInfluentialIs the Sample Good Enough? Comparing Data from Twitter's Streaming API with Twitter's Firehose
Morstatter, F., Pfeffer, J., Liu, H., & Carley, K. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v7i1.14401 · Cited by 863
Heverin, T., & Zach, L. (2012) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.21685 · Cited by 209 · cited 1×
“We decided to focus on peaks of original tweets following the results of recent studies on Twitter use during crisis events, showing the predominance of this type of content during the critical period of a violent crisis (Heverin & Zach, 2012).”
Background
Cited by
Dual Screening the Political: Media Events, Social Media, and Citizen Engagement
Vaccari, C., Chadwick, A., & O'Loughlin, B. (2015) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/jcom.12187 · Cited by 288
Williams, A., & Gonlin, V. (2017) · Information, Communication & Society · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2017.1303077 · Cited by 57
Twitter and Television in a Hybrid Media System: The 2013 Italian election campaign
Marchetti, R., & Ceccobelli, D. (2016) · Journalism Practice · doi:10.1080/17512786.2015.1040051 · Cited by 32
Metadata
- Authors
- Giglietto, F., & Selva, D.
- Venue
- Journal of Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-03-19
- Volume
- 64
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 260-277
- ISSN
- 0021-9916 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2163252504
- Cited by
- 231
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 37.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
