New methodologies for the digital age? How methods (re-)organize research using social media data

IF 4.1 Q1 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Yangliu Fan, Sune Lehmann, Anders Blok
{"title":"New methodologies for the digital age? How methods (re-)organize research using social media data","authors":"Yangliu Fan, Sune Lehmann, Anders Blok","doi":"10.1162/qss_a_00271","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract As “big and broad” social media data continues to expand and become a more prevalent source for research, much remains to be understood about its epistemological and methodological implications. Drawing on an original dataset of 12,732 research articles using social media data, we employ a novel dictionary-based approach to map the use of methods. Specifically, our approach draws on a combination of manual coding and embedding-enhanced query expansion. We cluster journals in groups of densely connected research communities to investigate how heterogeneous these groups are in terms of the methods used. First, our results indicate that research in this domain is largely organized by methods. Some communities tend to have a mono-method culture, while others combine methods in novel ways. Comparing practices across communities, we observe that computational methods have penetrated many research areas but not the research space surrounding ethnography. Second, we identify two core axes of variation—social sciences vs. computer science and methodological individualism vs. relationalism—that organize the domain as a whole, suggesting new methodological divisions and debates. Peer Review https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00271","PeriodicalId":34021,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Science Studies","volume":"10 6","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quantitative Science Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00271","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract As “big and broad” social media data continues to expand and become a more prevalent source for research, much remains to be understood about its epistemological and methodological implications. Drawing on an original dataset of 12,732 research articles using social media data, we employ a novel dictionary-based approach to map the use of methods. Specifically, our approach draws on a combination of manual coding and embedding-enhanced query expansion. We cluster journals in groups of densely connected research communities to investigate how heterogeneous these groups are in terms of the methods used. First, our results indicate that research in this domain is largely organized by methods. Some communities tend to have a mono-method culture, while others combine methods in novel ways. Comparing practices across communities, we observe that computational methods have penetrated many research areas but not the research space surrounding ethnography. Second, we identify two core axes of variation—social sciences vs. computer science and methodological individualism vs. relationalism—that organize the domain as a whole, suggesting new methodological divisions and debates. Peer Review https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00271
数字时代的新方法?如何利用社会媒体数据重新组织研究
随着“大而广”的社交媒体数据不断扩大,并成为更普遍的研究来源,其认识论和方法论意义仍有待了解。利用使用社交媒体数据的12,732篇研究文章的原始数据集,我们采用了一种新颖的基于词典的方法来绘制方法的使用情况。具体来说,我们的方法结合了手动编码和嵌入增强的查询扩展。我们将期刊聚集在紧密联系的研究群体中,以调查这些群体在使用方法方面的异质性。首先,我们的研究结果表明,该领域的研究在很大程度上是由方法组织的。一些社区倾向于单一方法文化,而其他社区则以新颖的方式组合方法。通过比较不同社区的实践,我们发现计算方法已经渗透到许多研究领域,但还没有渗透到民族志的研究领域。其次,我们确定了变化的两个核心轴——社会科学vs.计算机科学和方法论个人主义vs.关系主义——它们将这个领域组织为一个整体,提出了新的方法论划分和辩论。同行评议https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway/wos/peer-review/10.1162/qss_a_00271
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Quantitative Science Studies
Quantitative Science Studies INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
12.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
46
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊介绍:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信