谁在社交媒体上制定了谁的议程?对巴黎袭击事件推文的动态社交网络分析

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Fan Yang, Tongxin Sun
{"title":"谁在社交媒体上制定了谁的议程?对巴黎袭击事件推文的动态社交网络分析","authors":"Fan Yang, Tongxin Sun","doi":"10.1080/01463373.2021.1951789","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study investigates the agenda-setting theory in the context of social media through dynamic social network analyses of 102,145 Tweets in a week after Paris attack on Twitter. Results indicate that professional mass media organizations still hold a greater agenda-setting power than individual opinion leaders for setting the public agenda, as they obtain significantly more tweets, mentions, and replies from the public. While the overall media agenda significantly correlates with the agenda set by the individual opinion leaders on Paris attack, time-series analysis reveals the intermedia agenda-setting effects between mass media and individual opinion leaders on Twitter are immediate and decrease as time elapses. Methodological and theoretical implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who has set whose agenda on social media? A dynamic social network analysis of Tweets on Paris attack\",\"authors\":\"Fan Yang, Tongxin Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01463373.2021.1951789\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This study investigates the agenda-setting theory in the context of social media through dynamic social network analyses of 102,145 Tweets in a week after Paris attack on Twitter. Results indicate that professional mass media organizations still hold a greater agenda-setting power than individual opinion leaders for setting the public agenda, as they obtain significantly more tweets, mentions, and replies from the public. While the overall media agenda significantly correlates with the agenda set by the individual opinion leaders on Paris attack, time-series analysis reveals the intermedia agenda-setting effects between mass media and individual opinion leaders on Twitter are immediate and decrease as time elapses. Methodological and theoretical implications are discussed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-08-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951789\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1951789","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要本研究通过对巴黎推特遇袭后一周内102145条推文的动态社交网络分析,探讨了社交媒体背景下的议程设置理论。结果表明,在制定公共议程方面,专业大众媒体组织仍然比个人舆论领袖拥有更大的议程制定权,因为他们从公众那里获得了更多的推文、提及和回复。虽然整体媒体议程与个人舆论领袖在巴黎袭击事件中设定的议程显著相关,但时间序列分析显示,大众媒体和个人舆论领袖之间在推特上的中间议程设定效应是即时的,并随着时间的推移而减少。讨论了方法论和理论意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who has set whose agenda on social media? A dynamic social network analysis of Tweets on Paris attack
ABSTRACT This study investigates the agenda-setting theory in the context of social media through dynamic social network analyses of 102,145 Tweets in a week after Paris attack on Twitter. Results indicate that professional mass media organizations still hold a greater agenda-setting power than individual opinion leaders for setting the public agenda, as they obtain significantly more tweets, mentions, and replies from the public. While the overall media agenda significantly correlates with the agenda set by the individual opinion leaders on Paris attack, time-series analysis reveals the intermedia agenda-setting effects between mass media and individual opinion leaders on Twitter are immediate and decrease as time elapses. Methodological and theoretical implications are discussed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
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