Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

On the Joint Effect of Culture and Discussion Topics on X (Twitter) Signed Ego Networks (2402.18235v1)

Published 28 Feb 2024 in cs.SI

Abstract: Humans are known to structure social relationships according to certain patterns, such as the Ego Network Model (ENM). These patterns result from our innate cognitive limits and can therefore be observed in the vast majority of large human social groups. Until recently, the main focus of research was the structural characteristics of this model. The main aim of this paper is to complement previous findings with systematic and data-driven analyses on the positive and negative sentiments of social relationships, across different cultures, communities and topics of discussion. A total of 26 datasets were collected for this work. It was found that contrary to previous findings, the influence of culture is not easily ``overwhelmed'' by that of the topic of discussion. However, more specific and polarising topics do lead to noticeable increases in negativity across all cultures. These negativities also appear to be stable across the different levels of the ENM, which contradicts previous hypotheses. Finally, the number of generic topics being discussed between users seems to be a good predictor of the overall positivity of their relationships.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (30)
  1. Online social networks and information diffusion: The role of ego networks. Online Social Networks and Media 1 (2017), 44–55.
  2. Ego networks in twitter: an experimental analysis. In Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM. 3459–3464.
  3. Online social networks: human cognitive constraints in Facebook and Twitter personal graphs. Elsevier, The Netherlands.
  4. Xlm-t: Multilingual language models in twitter for sentiment analysis and beyond. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. 258–266.
  5. Twitter and the press: an ego-centred analysis. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018. 1471–1478.
  6. Unsupervised cross-lingual representation learning at scale. ICLR 2019 (2019).
  7. Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik. 1995. Support-vector networks. Machine learning 20 (1995), 273–297.
  8. Topic modeling in embedding spaces. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics 8 (2020), 439–453.
  9. Robin IM Dunbar. 1992. Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of human evolution 22, 6 (1992), 469–493.
  10. Robin IM Dunbar. 1998. The social brain hypothesis. Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues, News, and Reviews: Issues, News, and Reviews 6, 5 (1998), 178–190.
  11. Robin I. M. Dunbar. 1993. Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and brain sciences 16, 4 (1993), 681–694.
  12. The structure of online social networks mirrors those in the offline world. Social networks 43 (2015), 39–47.
  13. Robin I. M. Dunbar and Matt Spoors. 1995. Social networks, support cliques, and kinship. Human nature 6 (1995), 273–290.
  14. Keinosuke Fukunaga and Larry Hostetler. 1975. The estimation of the gradient of a density function, with applications in pattern recognition. IEEE Transactions on information theory 21, 1 (1975), 32–40.
  15. Eric Gilbert and Karrie Karahalios. 2009. Predicting tie strength with social media. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 211–220.
  16. Why marriages succeed or fail: And how you can make yours last. Simon and Schuster.
  17. Mark S Granovetter. 1973. The strength of weak ties. American journal of sociology 78, 6 (1973), 1360–1380.
  18. Maarten Grootendorst. 2022. BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794 (2022).
  19. Betty Hart and Todd R Risley. 1995. Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children. Paul H Brookes Publishing.
  20. Russell A Hill and Robin IM Dunbar. 2003. Social network size in humans. Human nature 14, 1 (2003), 53–72.
  21. Machine reading tea leaves: Automatically evaluating topic coherence and topic model quality. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics. 530–539.
  22. Time as a limited resource: Communication strategy in mobile phone networks. Social networks 35, 1 (2013), 89–95.
  23. Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2019. Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.10084 (2019).
  24. Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2020. Making monolingual sentence embeddings multilingual using knowledge distillation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.09813 (2020).
  25. Modelling the role of trust in social relationships. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT) 15, 4 (2015), 1–24.
  26. Signed ego network model and its application to Twitter. IEEE BigData 2022 (2022).
  27. Cultural Differences in Signed Ego Networks on Twitter: An Investigatory Analysis. In Companion Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2023. 1039–1049.
  28. Keep Your Friends Close, and Your Enemies Closer: Structural Properties of Negative Relationships on Twitter. arXiv:2401.16562 [cs.SI]
  29. Structural Models of Human Social Interactions in Online Smart Communities: the Case of Region-based Journalists on Twitter. Online Social Networks and Media 30 (2021).
  30. Journalists’ ego networks in Twitter: Invariant and distinctive structural features. Online Social Networks and Media 30 (2022), 100207.
Citations (2)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now