Analyzing history-related posts in twitter

Sumikawa, Yasunobu; Jatowt, Adam

doi:10.1007/s00799-020-00296-2

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While recently there has been an increase in the application of computational approaches for studying (digital) memory practices, for instance, to analyse large volumes of available data (e.g. Barna and Knap, 2022; Makhortykh et al, 2021a; Sumikawa and Jatowt, 2021) or to understand the functionality of AI-driven system used for distributing memory-related content (e.g. Makhortykh et al, 2021b; Zavadski and Toeplf, 2019), the field of memory studies still primarily relies on qualitative approaches for examining how digital platforms impact the processes of remembrance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The user is dead, long live the platform? Problematising the user-centric focus of (digital) memory studies

Makhortykh

2023

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rise of digital technologies has caused a major shift in memory studies. The unprecedented possibilities for storing and retrieving information enabled by platforms not only expand capacities for preserving memory-related content for individuals and collectives but also challenge existing memory power structures. An integral constituent of the scholarly assessment of these transformations is the increased focus on the memory actors’ agency and connectivity. Despite the importance of such a user-centric focus, the article argues that it can be limiting for the field of (digital) memory studies conceptually and methodologically. Under the condition when platforms and their algorithms turn into (hegemonic) memory actors themselves and determine what data memory scholars and the general public can (not) access, there is a pressing need for critically revisiting the key assumptions about memory in the digital age. To address this need, the article discusses the fundamental premises of a more infrastructure-centric approach to memory studies together with the conceptual and methodological implications of its adoption for studying individual and collective remembrance.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Big data approaches for data collection and analysis (e.g. Sumikawa and Jatowt, 2021) can counter this limitation. Similarly, when applied to data on user online behaviour (e.g.…”

Section: Recognising the Importance Of Big Data Research In The Conte...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The user is dead, long live the platform? Problematising the user-centric focus of (digital) memory studies

Makhortykh

2023

Memory Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hashtag Category Definition . The hashtag categories are defined from manual investigation of a large sample of collected tweets [3 , 4] .…”

Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Annotated dataset of history-related tweets

Sumikawa

Jatowt

2021

Data in Brief

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we present a dataset containing history-related content obtained from social media. It contains hashtags and tweets that include these hashtags, as well as the results of third party tools applied to the tweets that include extracted entities, years, and url categories, and the categories for the history-related hashtags we used to crawl the tweets. We collected the tweets from Twitter official API using hashtag-based crawling. The crawling process had been performed from March 2016 to July 2018. During the crawling, we applied a bootstrapping approach which is an iterative process of collecting tweets using a small set of seed hashtags, and a manual inspection of newly acquired hashtags that co-occur with the seed hashtags to include those they are related to history. Finally, we collected 147 history-related hashtags and 2,370,252 tweets. We then defined 6 categories for the collected hashtags after their manual investigation. The presented dataset could be useful for further analysis on how people refer to history in Twitter, for collecting new history-related tweets, for training classifiers to detect history-related tweets, or for further investigations of the proposed hashtag categories.

show abstract