The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Chatter on the red: what hazards threat reveals about the social life of microblogged information
Abstract
This paper considers a subset of the computer-mediated communication (CMC) that took place during the flooding of the Red River Valley in the US and Canada in March and April 2009. Focusing on the use of Twitter, a microblogging service, we identified mechanisms of information production, distribution, and organization. The Red River event resulted in a rapid generation of Twitter communications by numerous sources using a variety of communications forms, including autobiographical and mainstream media reporting, among other types. We examine the social life of microblogged information, identifying generative, synthetic, derivative and innovative properties that sustain the broader system of interaction. The landscape of Twitter is such that the production of new information is supported through derivative activities of directing, relaying, synthesizing, and redistributing, and is additionally complemented by socio-technical innovation. These activities comprise self-organization of information.
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 Duality of Technology: Rethinking the Concept of Technology in Organizations
Orlikowski, W. J. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.398 · Cited by 4,957
Cited by
Processing Social Media Messages in Mass Emergency: A Survey
Imran, M., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., & Vieweg, S. (2015) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/2771588 · Cited by 804
Self-citationDetecting Automation of Twitter Accounts: Are You a Human, Bot, or Cyborg?
Chu, Z., Gianvecchio, S., Wang, H., & Jajodia, S. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing · doi:10.1109/tdsc.2012.75 · Cited by 634
(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
Self-citationSharing Knowledge and Expertise: The CSCW View of Knowledge Management
Ackerman, M. S., Dachtera, J., Pipek, V., & Wulf, V. (2013) · Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1007/s10606-013-9192-8 · Cited by 229
(2016) · Thammasat University Digital Collections · Cited by 153
Metadata
- Authors
- Starbird, K., Palen, L., Hughes, A. L., & Vieweg, S.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-02-06
- Pages
- 241-250
- OpenAlex
- W2050237388
- Cited by
- 438
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 74.63
- 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
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.
