tweets and scientific conferences: the use case of the science 2.0 conference
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Tweets and Scientific Conferences
The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters
![Page 2: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 2
Agenda
2 Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
4 Conclusion
3 Results
5 Future Work
Introduction, Motivation and Research Questions1
![Page 3: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
• Time stamp for each tweet allows time-specific analysis• Heavy tweeting can be linked to the conference program• Previous studies often analyzed only on a daily basis
(Ross et al., 2011)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 3
Introduction
• Rapid growing and best example: Twitter• Twitter as center of attention in scientific community• Use social network services for awareness support
Microblogging and Scientific Conferences
• „#“ – hashtag, to group and easily follow topics over time• „@“ – at, to directly reference and raise attention
Twitter signs
Timeline
(Java et al., 2007)
(Reinhardt et al., 2009)
(Ross et al., 2011)
(Reinhardt et al., 2011)
(Sherr, 2014)
![Page 4: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 4
Motivation
• Promote the conference and usage of a hashtag• General information and related aspects (dates, keynotes, …)• Increase excitement and establish a community
Before a conference
• Last minutes changes or announcements• Discussions on conference presentations
During a conference
• Thank attendees• Asking for feedback• References to related blogs, newspapers, …
After a conference
(Reinhardt et al., 2009)
![Page 5: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 5
Research questions
Are there any particular events or occasions that lead to peaks in Twitter activity during a scientific conference?1
Is it possible for the content-based analysis of the tweets (categorization and prediction) to develop a general codebook for scientific conferences?
• Purpose of tweet• Target of web link• Content itself
2
![Page 6: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 6
Agenda
2 Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
4 Conclusion
3 Results
5 Future Work
Introduction, Motivation and Research Questions1
![Page 7: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
•Tweet observation period: 14.03.2014 - 14.04.2014•Testbed: Science 2.0 conference in Hamburg, Germany
• 26th and 27th March, 2014; English speaking conference + live stream• 153 registered attendees (analysis for attendees and non-attendees)
•Hashtag for analysis: #sci20conf •Tweets from conference organizers: @lfvscience20•1879 tweets collected – 676 for the final analysis
• Excluded: 665 redundancy; 489 retweets, 49 modified tweets• 582 from attendees (86%), 94 from non-attendees (14%)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 7
Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
![Page 8: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 8
Agenda
2 Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
4 Conclusion
3 Results
5 Future Work
Introduction, Motivation and Research Questions1
![Page 9: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 9
Results
Results comparable to other studies! (Ross et al., 2011)
• Mean: 6.83• SD: 15.62• Maximum: 95• Median: 1• 51.5% of users sent only one
tweet
• 1214 tweets• 489 retweets (40%)• 718 tweets with “@” sign (59%)
• 229 without retweets (19%)• 648 with link (53%)
• 287 without retweets (24%)
![Page 10: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 10
Results – peak analysis
Results counter results of other studies! (Ebner et al., 2010)
Support for the first research question!
• 822 tweets from conference attendees (68%) – 392 non-attendees (32%)• BUT: 200 retweets conference attendees (24%) – 289 non-attendees (74%)
![Page 11: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 11
Results – content analysis
• I = conference content• T = sharing resources• N = note• O = organization and
announcements• B = conditions of
conference• A = other
• Inter-rater reliability:• Fleiss‘ Kappa = .60 • Moderate• Agreement rate: 68%• All results p < 0.01
![Page 12: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 12
Results – content analysis – example
“Schoepflin: scholars can exploit the potential of the Internet only if everything is #OA”
“free wifi #sci20conf , choose Riverside Hotel, kostenlos, AGB and its a go!”
“Lightning Talks. #impressions #sci20confhttp://t.co/aGp8jVycIw”
“The list of participants will not be published online. #sci20conf”
“On my way to #sci20conf”
“Today's conference hashtags to follow: #dhd2014 (continued), #sci20conf, #c4l14”
Conference content
Conditions of the conference
Sharing resources
Organization andannouncements
Note
Other
![Page 13: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 13
Results – content analysis
• BI = pictures• KO = conference website• AR = article• WE = web portal• VI = video• FO = presentation slides• BL = pictures• DO = documents• OR = organization
• Inter-rater reliability:• Fleiss‘ Kappa = .85 • Substantial• Agreement rate: 88%• All results p < 0.01
![Page 14: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 14
Results – content analysis
• WIS = scientific methods• PRO = projects• SOC = social web• OPE = open science• SON = other• BIG = big data• KON = conferences• BIB = libraries• UNT = enterprises• BEG = terms analysis
• Inter-rater reliability:• Fleiss‘ Kappa = .58 • Moderate• Agreement rate: 48%• All results p < 0.05
Support for the second research question!
![Page 15: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 15
Additional peak analysis
32% more conference content during peaks! (63% vs. 43%)
No significant results for the URL class.
Content of tweets varied very much for the different peaks, in accordance
to the concurrent presentation.
![Page 16: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 16
Agenda
2 Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
4 Conclusion
3 Results
5 Future Work
Introduction, Motivation and Research Questions1
![Page 17: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 17
Conclusion
• 4 week analysis of Science 2.0 conference
• No noticeable activity before of after the conference• No equal distribution of tweets over time
• Codebook validation successful
• Twitter activity highest after lunch and coffee breaks• Any information or regulation of the conference
should happen at these moments!
![Page 18: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 18
Agenda
2 Methods for Evaluation and Analysis
4 Conclusion
3 Results
5 Future Work
Introduction, Motivation and Research Questions1
![Page 19: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 19
Future Work
• Sophisticated quantitative and qualitativein-depth analysis
• Factor analysis for hashtags and classes
• Comparison with other scientific conferences
• Comparison with Science 2.0 2015 conference• Preliminary result: codebook performed excellent
• Development of algorithms e.g. to stir up debates during less interesting presentations
![Page 20: Tweets and Scientific Conferences: The Use Case of the Science 2.0 Conference](https://reader035.vdocuments.mx/reader035/viewer/2022070523/58ed925b1a28ab21418b46c7/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Thank you very much for your attention!
Questions?
Contact: [email protected]
Athanasios Mazarakis and Isabella Peters – ECSM 2015, 10 th of July, Porto, Portugal 20
Thank you!