[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/3314183.3323673acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesumapConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Shaping the Reaction: Community Characteristics and Emotional Tone of Citizen Responses to Robotics Videos at TED versus YouTube

Published: 06 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

When modelling for the social we need to consider more than one medium. Little is known as to how platform community characteristics shape the discussion and how communicators could best engage each community, taking into consideration these characteristics. We consider comments on TED videos featuring roboticists, shared at TED.com and YouTube. We find evidence of different social norms and importantly, approaches to comment writing. The emotional tone is more positive at TED; however, there is little emotional escalation in either platform. The study highlights the importance of considering the community characteristics of a medium, when communicating with the public in a case study of emerging technologies.

References

[1]
Swati, Agarwal and Ashish Sureka. (2014) A focused crawler for mining hate and extremism promoting videos on YouTube. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM conference on Hypertext and social media: ACM, pp. 294--296.
[2]
Peter, Bentley and Svein Kyvik. (2011) Academic staff and public communication: a survey of popular science publishing across 13 countries. Public Understanding of Science Vol. 20, No.1, pp. 48--63.
[3]
Shlomo, Berkovsky, Ronnie Taib, Yoshinori Hijikata, Pavel Braslavsku, and Bart Knijnenburg. "A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Trust in Recommender Systems." In Proceedings of the 26th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, pp. 285--289. ACM, 2018.
[4]
Holly M. Bik, & Goldstein, Miriam C. (2013). An introduction to social media for scientists. PLoS biology, Vol. 11, No.4, e1001535.
[5]
Daren C. Brabham (2013) Crowdsourcing: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[6]
Michael A., Cohn, Mehl, Matthias R., & Pennebaker, James W. (2004). Linguistic markers of psychological change surrounding September 11, 2001. Psychological science, vol. 15, no. 10, 687--693.
[7]
Alastair J., Gill, French, Robert M., Gergle, Darren, & Oberlander, Jon. (2008, November). The language of emotion in short blog texts. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM conference on CSCW: ACM, pp. 299--302.
[8]
Susan, C. Herring (2004). Computer-Mediated Discourse Analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In: S. Barab, R. Kling, and J.H. Gray (eds): Designing for Virtual Communities in the Service of Learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 338--376.
[9]
Hepeng, Jia Dapeng Wang, Weishan Miao, and Hongjun Zhu. Encountered but Not Engaged: Examining the Use of Social Media for Science Communication by Chinese Scientists. Sci Comm. 39, no. 5 (2017): 646--672.
[10]
Elisabeth, Joyce and Kraut, Robert E. (2006) Predicting continued participation in newsgroups. Journal of Comp.-Mediated Communication, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 723--747.
[11]
Ewa, Kacewicz, Pennebaker, James W., Davis, Matthew, Jeon, Moongee, & Graesser, Arthur C. (2014). Pronoun use reflects standings in social hierarchies. Journal of Language and Soc Psyc., Vol. 33, No. 2, pp. 125--143.
[12]
Styliani, Kleanthous, Grigoris Michael, George Samaras, and Vania Dimitrova. (2017) Individual Differences in Music Video Interaction: An exploratory Analysis. In Adjunct Publication of the 25th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, pp. 241--246. ACM.
[13]
Matthew L., Newman, Pennebaker, James W., Berry, Diane S. & Richards, Jane M. (2003). Lying words: Predicting deception from linguistic styles. Personality and social psychology bulletin, Vol. 29, No. 5, pp. 665--675.
[14]
James W., Pennebaker, Boyd, Ryan. L., Jordan, Kayla., & Blackburn, Kate. (2015). The Development and Psychometric Properties of LIWC2015. Austin, TX: Uni of Texas at Austin.
[15]
Jenny, Preece, and Diane Maloney-Krichmar. Online communities: Design, theory, and practice. Journal of Comp.-Med. Comm. 10.4 (2005): JCMC10410.
[16]
Andrew J. Scholand, Tausczik, Yla. R., & Pennebaker, James. W. (2010, February). Social Language Network Analysis. In Proceedings of the 2010 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work: ACM, pp. 23--26.
[17]
Andrew, Tsou, Mike Thelwall, Philippe Mongeon, and Cassidy R. Sugimoto. (2014) A community of curious souls: an analysis of commenting behavior on TED talks videos. PloS one, Vol. 9, No.4: e93609.
[18]
Leona Yi-Fan, Su, Dietram A. Scheufele, Larry Bell, Dominique Brossard, and Michael A. Xenos. Information-Sharing and Community-Building: Exploring the Use of Twitter in Science Pub. Rel. Sci. Comm. 39, no. 5 (2017): 569--597.
[19]
Giuseppe Alessandro, Veltri. (2013). Microblogging and nanotweets: Nanotechnology on Twitter. Public Und. of Science, Vol.22, No.7, pp. 832--849.
[20]
Giuseppe Alessandro Veltri & Atanasova, Dimitrinka. (2015). Climate change on Twitter: Content, media ecology and information sharing behaviour. Public Understanding of Science, 0963662515613702
[21]
Joseph B., Walther, David DeAndrea, Jinsuk Kim, and James C. Anthony. (2010) The influence of online comments on perceptions of antimarijuana public service announcements on YouTube. Human Comm. Res. 36, no. 4 (2010): 469--492.
[22]
Chyan, Yang Yi-Chun Hsu, and Suyanti Tan. (2010) Predicting the determinants of users' intentions for using YouTube to share video: moderating gender effects. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, Vol.13, No.2, pp 141--152.

Index Terms

  1. Shaping the Reaction: Community Characteristics and Emotional Tone of Citizen Responses to Robotics Videos at TED versus YouTube

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    UMAP'19 Adjunct: Adjunct Publication of the 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
    June 2019
    455 pages
    ISBN:9781450367110
    DOI:10.1145/3314183
    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]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 06 June 2019

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. community characteristics
    2. emerging technologies
    3. emotional tone
    4. online community
    5. online community norms

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    Conference

    UMAP '19
    Sponsor:

    Acceptance Rates

    UMAP'19 Adjunct Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 122 submissions, 25%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 162 of 633 submissions, 26%

    Upcoming Conference

    UMAP '25

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • 0
      Total Citations
    • 76
      Total Downloads
    • Downloads (Last 12 months)8
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
    Reflects downloads up to 26 Dec 2024

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media