The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read
Abstract
In recent years, tagging systems have become increasingly popular. These systems enable users to add keywords (i.e., "tags") to Internet resources (e.g., web pages, images, videos) without relying on a controlled vocabulary. Tagging systems have the potential to improve search, spam detection, reputation systems, and personal organization while introducing new modalities of social communication and opportunities for data mining. This potential is largely due to the social structure that underlies many of the current systems.Despite the rapid expansion of applications that support tagging of resources, tagging systems are still not well studied or understood. In this paper, we provide a short description of the academic related work to date. We offer a model of tagging systems, specifically in the context of web-based systems, to help us illustrate the possible benefits of these tools. Since many such systems already exist, we provide a taxonomy of tagging systems to help inform their analysis and design, and thus enable researchers to frame and compare evidence for the sustainability of such systems. We also provide a simple taxonomy of incentives and contribution models to inform potential evaluative frameworks. While this work does not present comprehensive empirical results, we present a preliminary study of the photo-sharing and tagging system Flickr to demonstrate our model and explore some of the issues in one sample system. This analysis helps us outline and motivate possible future directions of research in tagging systems.
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
Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications
Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815478 · Cited by 17,557
Centrality in social networks conceptual clarification
Freeman, L. C. (1978) · Social Networks · doi:10.1016/0378-8733(78)90021-7 · Cited by 17,062
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
Cited by
Why we tag: motivations for annotation in mobile and online media
Ames, M., & Naaman, M. (2007) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/1240624.1240772 · Cited by 833
Self-citationCrandall, D. J., Backstrom, L., Huttenlocher, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2009) · Proceedings of the 18th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1526709.1526812 · Cited by 769
Influence and correlation in social networks
Anagnostopoulos, A., Kumar, R., & Mahdian, M. (2008) · Proceedings of the 14th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining · doi:10.1145/1401890.1401897 · Cited by 674
Latent dirichlet allocation for tag recommendation
Krestel, R., Fankhauser, P., & Nejdl, W. (2009) · Proceedings of the third ACM conference on Recommender systems · doi:10.1145/1639714.1639726 · Cited by 494
Inferring social ties from geographic coincidences
Crandall, D. J., Backstrom, L., Cosley, D., Suri, S., Huttenlocher, D., & Kleinberg, J. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1006155107 · Cited by 473
Metadata
- Authors
- Marlow, C., Naaman, M., Boyd, D., & Davis, M.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the seventeenth conference on Hypertext and hypermedia
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2006-08-22
- Pages
- 31-40
- OpenAlex
- W2103467726
- Cited by
- 877
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 76.84
- Type
- conference paper
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1149941.1149949
- The paper
- Marlow, C., Naaman, M., Boyd, D., & Davis, M. (2006). HT06, tagging paper, taxonomy, Flickr, academic article, to read. Proceedings of the seventeenth conference on Hypertext and hypermedia. https://doi.org/10.1145/1149941.1149949
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.