skip to main content
10.1145/1964858.1964869acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we RT?

Published:25 July 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this article we explore the behavior of Twitter users under an emergency situation. In particular, we analyze the activity related to the 2010 earthquake in Chile and characterize Twitter in the hours and days following this disaster. Furthermore, we perform a preliminary study of certain social phenomenons, such as the dissemination of false rumors and confirmed news. We analyze how this information propagated through the Twitter network, with the purpose of assessing the reliability of Twitter as an information source under extreme circumstances. Our analysis shows that the propagation of tweets that correspond to rumors differs from tweets that spread news because rumors tend to be questioned more than news by the Twitter community. This result shows that it is posible to detect rumors by using aggregate analysis on tweets.

References

  1. B. De Longueville, R. S. Smith, and G. Luraschi. "OMG, from here, I can see the flames!": a use case of mining location based social networks to acquire spatio-temporal data on forest fires. In LBSN '09: Proceedings of the 2009 International Workshop on Location Based Social Networks, pages 73--80, New York, NY, USA, 2009. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. P. S. Earle, M. Guy, C. Ostrum, S. Horvath, and R. A. Buckmaster. OMG Earthquake! Can Twitter improve earthquake response? AGU Fall Meeting Abstracts, pages B1697+, Dec. 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. A. L. Hughes and L. Palen. Twitter adoption and use in mass convergence and emergency events. In ISCRAM Conference, May 2009.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. K. Kireyev, L. Palen, and K. Anderson. Applications of topics models to analysis of disaster-related twitter data. In NIPS Workshop on Applications for Topic Models: Text and Beyond, December 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, and S. Moon. What is twitter, a social network or a news media? In World Wide Web Conference. ACM Press, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. J. N. Logue, M. E. Melick, and H. Hansen. Research issues and directions in the epidemiology of health effects of disasters. Epidemiologic reviews, 3(140--62), 1981.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. L. Palen and S. B. Liu. Citizen communications in crisis: anticipating a future of ict-supported public participation. In CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 727--736, New York, NY, USA, 2007. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Twitter study. Technical report, Pear Analytics, August 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. J. W. Powell and J. Rayner. Progress notes: Disaster investigation. Technical report, Maryland Army Chemical Center, 1952.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. J. Sankaranarayanan, H. Samet, B. E. Teitler, M. D. Lieberman, and J. Sperling. TwitterStand: news in tweets. In GIS '09: Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGSPATIAL International Conference on Advances in Geographic Information Systems, pages 42--51, New York, NY, USA, November 2009. ACM Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. K. Starbird, L. Palen, A. L. Hughes, and S. Vieweg. Chatter on the red: what hazards threat reveals about the social life of microblogged information. In CSCW '10: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, pages 241--250, New York, NY, USA, 2010. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. S. Vieweg. Microblogged contributions to the emergency arena: Discovery, interpretation and implications. In Computer Supported Collaborative Work, February 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. S. Vieweg, A. Hughes, K. Starbird, and L. Palen. Microblogging during two natural hazards events: What twitter may contribute to situational awareness. In Proceedings of ACM Conference on Computer Human Interaction (CHI), April 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Twitter under crisis: can we trust what we RT?

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SOMA '10: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Social Media Analytics
      July 2010
      145 pages
      ISBN:9781450302173
      DOI:10.1145/1964858

      Copyright © 2010 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 25 July 2010

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Upcoming Conference

      KDD '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader