Causal discovery in social media using quasi-experimental designs
Abstract
Social media systems have become increasingly attractive to both users and companies providing those systems. Efficient management of these systems is essential and requires knowledge of cause-and-effect relationships within the system. Online experimentation can be used to discover causal knowledge; however, this ignores the observational data that is already being collected for operational purposes. Quasi-experimental designs (QEDs) are commonly used in social sciences to discover causal knowledge from observational data, and QEDs can be exploited to discover causal knowledge about social media systems. In this paper, we apply three different QEDs to demonstrate how one can gain a causal understanding of a social media system. The conclusions drawn from using a QED can have threats to their validity, but we show how one can carefully construct sophisticated designs to overcome some of those threats.
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?
Different strategies to identify a control group may lead to different degrees of similarity among the treated users and the control group, and, thus, to different estimates of the treatment effect.
“different strategies may lead to different degrees of similarity among the treated users and the control group, and, thus, to different estimates of the treatment effect (Oktay et al., 2010).”
From Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries (2019) · cites this paper as Oktay et al., 2010
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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
“Yet, different such strategies may lead to different degrees of similarity among the treated users and the control group, and, thus, to different results [Oktay et al. 2010].”
BackgroundSocial 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
- Authors
- Oktay, H., Taylor, B. J., & Jensen, D. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Massachusetts Amherst (US)
- ORCID
- Jensen, David D.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2010-07-25
- Pages
- 1-9
- OpenAlex
- W1965032599
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 5
- FWCI
- 13.05
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Bayesian Modeling and Causal Inference
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Simulation Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- causal discovery, quasi-experimental design, observational data, online experiments, causal inference, threats to validity, social media management
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