Tools and methods for capturing twitter data during natural disasters
Open accessAbstract
During the course of several natural disasters in recent years, Twitter has been found to play an important role as an additional medium for many-to-many crisis communication. Emergency services are successfully using Twitter to inform the public about current developments, and are increasingly also attempting to source first-hand situational information from Twitter feeds (such as relevant hashtags). The further study of the uses of Twitter during natural disasters relies on the development of flexible and reliable research infrastructure for tracking and analysing Twitter feeds at scale and in close to real time, however. This article outlines two approaches to the development of such infrastructure: one which builds on the readily available open source platform yourTwapperkeeper to provide a low-cost, simple, and basic solution; and one which establishes a more powerful and flexible framework by drawing on highly scaleable, state-of-the-art technology.
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?
The availability of tools may enable the participation of those lacking the resources to create their own.
“Beyond aiding reproducibility and future comparisons, the availability of tools may also enable the participation of those lacking the resources to create their own (e.g., many researchers outside of computer science) (boyd and Crawford, 2012; Bruns and Liang, 2012).”
From Social Data: Biases, Methodological Pitfalls, and Ethical Boundaries (2019) · cites this paper as Bruns and Liang, 2012
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
“Beyond aiding reproducibility and future comparisons, the availability of tools may also enable the participation of those lacking the resources to create their own (e.g., many researchers outside of computer science) (boyd and Crawford, 2012; Bruns and Liang, 2012).”
BackgroundCrisisLex: A Lexicon for Collecting and Filtering Microblogged Communications in Crises
Olteanu, A., Castillo, C., Diaz, F., & Vieweg, S. (2014) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14538 · Cited by 397 · see citing works
Social 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
Building Personalized Trust: Discovering What Makes One Trust and Act on Facebook Posts
Zhou, M. X., Yang, H., Mark, G., Hu, M., Mahumd, J., & Pal, A. (2021) · ACM Transactions on Social Computing · doi:10.1145/3468977 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
- Authors
- Bruns, A., & Liang, Y. E.
- Affiliations
- Queensland University of Technology (AU)
- National Chengchi University (TW)
- ORCID
- Bruns, Axel
- Venue
- First Monday
- Publisher
- University of Illinois Libraries
- Published
- 2012-03-26
- ISSN
- 1396-0458 (ISSN-L)
- 1396-0466
- OpenAlex
- W2089298720
- Cited by
- 239
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 81.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
- doi.org
- Locations
- First Monday (publishedVersion)
- QUT ePrints (Queensland University of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Keywords
- Twitter, natural disasters, crisis communication, social media data collection, real-time analytics, hashtags, emergency services, open source software
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