The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Is it really about me?: message content in social awareness streams
Abstract
In this work we examine the characteristics of social activity and patterns of communication on Twitter, a prominent example of the emerging class of communication systems we call "social awareness streams." We use system data and message content from over 350 Twitter users, applying human coding and quantitative analysis to provide a deeper understanding of the activity of individuals on the Twitter network. In particular, we develop a content-based categorization of the type of messages posted by Twitter users, based on which we examine users' activity. Our analysis shows two common types of user behavior in terms of the content of the posted messages, and exposes differences between users in respect to these activities.
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
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · Cited by 9,939
“Gesundheit! Modeling Contagion through Facebook News Feed.”
Sun, E., Rosenn, I., Marlow, C., & Lento, T. (2009) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v3i1.13947 · Cited by 218
Cited by
Information credibility on twitter
Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., & Poblete, B. (2011) · Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1963405.1963500 · Cited by 2,593
Emotions 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
Word of mouth and interpersonal communication: A review and directions for future research
Berger, J. (2014) · Journal of Consumer Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2014.05.002 · Cited by 1,469
Personalizing Dialogue Agents: I have a dog, do you have pets too?
Zhang, S., Dinan, E., Urbanek, J., Szlam, A., Kiela, D., & Weston, J. (2018) · Proceedings of the 56th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p18-1205 · Cited by 1,177
How Does Brand-related User-generated Content Differ across YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter?
Smith, A. N., Fischer, E., & Yongjian, C. (2012) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2012.01.002 · Cited by 1,044
Metadata
- Authors
- Naaman, M., Boase, J., & Lai, C.-H.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-02-06
- Pages
- 189-192
- OpenAlex
- W2139575250
- Cited by
- 720
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 58.79
- 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: Is it really about me?: message content in social awareness streams. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1718918.1718953
- The paper
- Naaman, M., Boase, J., & Lai, C.-H. (2010). Is it really about me?: message content in social awareness streams. Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work. https://doi.org/10.1145/1718918.1718953
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.
