Humans are adept social animals capable of identifying friendship groups from a combination of linguistic cues and social network patterns. But what is more important, the content of what people say or their history of social interactions? Moreover, is it possible to identify whether people are part of a group with changing membership merely from general network properties, such as measures of centrality and latent communities? In this paper, we address the problem of identifying social groups from conversation data and present results of an empirical study on identifying groups in a virtual world. Virtual worlds are interesting because group membership is more shaped by common interests and less influenced by cultural and socio-economic factors. Our finding is that a combination of network measures is more predictive of group membership than language cues, and that both types of features can be combined to improve prediction.

Identifying which outlet in social media leads the rest in disseminating novel information on specific topics is an interesting challenge for information analysts and social scientists. In this work, we hypothesize that novel ideas are disseminated through the creation and propagation of new or newly emphasized key words, and therefore lead/lag of outlets can be estimated by tracking word usage across these outlets. First, we demonstrate the validaty of our hypothesis by showing that a simple TF-IDF based nearest-neighbors approach can recover generally accepted lead/lag behavior on the outlets pair of ACM journal articles and conference papers. Next, we build a new topic model called LeadLag LDA that estimates the lead/lag of the outlets on specific topics. We validate the topic model using the lead/lag results from the TF-IDF nearest neighbors approach. Finally, we present results from our model on two different outlet pairs of blogs vs. news media and grant proposals vs. research publications that reveal interesting patterns.

More and more users have been taking various actions to diverse resources referred to by URLs such as news, web pages, images, products, movies as a result of the growth of social media. They are annotating, tweeting in Twitter, reblogging in Tumblr, and Liking in Facebook, etc. Analyses about these diverse actions will be useful for aggregating or integrating diverse resources. In this paper, we view users’ actions to resources as expressing their some interests, and by investigating how their interests are expressed in social media, we get suggestions for aggregations. Our results show that a certain kind of action (such as tagging on Delicious) can be used to make predictions on a different kind of action (such as favorite on Twitter). These analyses will be useful for aggregating or integrating diverse contents on multiple sources. In addition to some experimental analyses, we propose a novel method to predict users’ interests in social media, using time-evolving, multinomial relational data. Our experimental results show that the proposed method significantly outperforms standard tensor analysis and an existing state-of-the-art method (LDA) in prediction tasks.

Twitter and other microblogs have rapidly become a significant means by which people communicate with the world and each other in near realtime. There has been a large number of studies surrounding these social media, focusing on areas such as information spread, various centrality measures, topic detection and more. However, one area which has not received much attention is trying to better understand what information is being spread and why it is being spread. This work looks to get a better understanding of what makes people spread information in tweets or microblogs through the use of retweeting. Several retweet behavior models are presented and evaluated on a Twitter data set consisting of over 768,000 tweets gathered from monitoring over 30,000 users for a period of one month. We evaluate the proposed models against each user and show how people use different retweet behavior models. For example, we find that although users in the majority of cases do not retweet information on topics that they themselves Tweet about as or from people who are "like them" (hence anti-homophily), we do find that models which do take homophily, or similarity, into account fits the observed retweet behaviors much better than other more general models which do not take this into account. We further find that, not surprisingly, people's retweeting behavior is better explained through multiple different models rather than one model.

In this work, we study the use of Twitter by House, Senate and gubernatorial candidates during the midterm (2010) elections in the U.S. Our data includes almost 700 candidates and over 690k documents that they produced and cited in the 3.5 years leading to the elections. We utilize graph and text mining techniques to analyze differences between Democrats, Republicans and Tea Party candidates, and suggest a novel use of language modeling for estimating content cohesiveness. Our findings show significant differences in the usage patterns of social media, and suggest conservative candidates used this medium more effectively, conveying a coherent message and maintaining a dense graph of connections. Despite the lack of party leadership, we find Tea Party members display both structural and language-based cohesiveness. Finally, we investigate the relation between network structure, content and election results by creating a proof-of-concept model that predicts candidate victory with an accuracy of 88.0%.

The rise in popularity of social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook has been paralleled by the rise of unwanted, disruptive entities on these networks- — including spammers, malware disseminators, and other content polluters. Inspired by sociologists working to ensure the success of commons and criminologists focused on deterring vandalism and preventing crime, we present the first long-term study of social honeypots for tempting, profiling, and filtering content polluters in social media. Concretely, we report on our experiences via a seven-month deployment of 60 honeypots on Twitter that resulted in the harvesting of 36,000 candidate content polluters. As part of our study, we (1) examine the harvested Twitter users, including an analysis of link payloads, user behavior over time, and followers/following network dynamics and (2) evaluate a wide range of features to investigate the effectiveness of automatic content polluter identification.

Internet memes are phenomena that rapidly gain popularity or notoriety on the Internet. Often, modifications or spoofs add to the profile of the original idea thus turning it into a phenomenon that transgresses social and cultural boundaries. It is commonly assumed that Internet memes spread virally but scientific evidence as to this assumption is scarce. In this paper, we address this issue and investigate the epidemic dynamics of 150 famous Internet memes. Our analysis is based on time series data that were collected from Google Insights, Delicious, Digg, and StumbleUpon. We find that differential equation models from mathematical epidemiology as well as simple log-normal distributions give a good account of the growth and decline of memes. We discuss the role of log-normal distributions in modeling Internet phenomena and touch on practical implications of our findings.

Social media, such as blogs, are often seen as democratic entities that allow more voices to be heard than the conventional mass or elite media. Some also feel that social media exhibits a balancing force against the arguably slanted elite media. A systematic comparison between social and mainstream media is necessary but challenging due to the scale and dynamic nature of modern communication. Here we propose empirical measures to quantify the extent and dynamics of social (blog) and mainstream (news) media bias. We focus on a particular form of bias--coverage quantity--as applied to stories about the 111th US Congress. We compare observed coverage of Members of Congress against a null model of unbiased coverage, testing for biases with respect to political party, popular front runners, regions of the country, and more. Our measures suggest distinct characteristics in news and blog media. A simple generative model, in agreement with data, reveals differences in the process of coverage selection between the two media.

Social media and networking websites, such as Twitter and Facebook, generate large quantities of information and have become mechanisms for real-time content dissipation to users. An important question that arises is: how do we sample such social media information spaces in order to deliver relevant content on a topic to end users? Notice that these large-scale information spaces are inherently diverse, featuring a wide array of attributes such as location, recency, degree of diffusion effects in the network and so on. Naturally, for the end user, different levels of diversity in social media content can significantly impact the information consumption experience: low diversity can provide focused content that may be simpler to understand, while high diversity can increase breadth in the exposure to multiple opinions and perspectives. Hence to address our research question, we turn to diversity as a core concept in our proposed sampling methodology. Here we are motivated by ideas in the "compressive sensing" literature and utilize the notion of sparsity in social media information to represent such large spaces via a small number of basis components. Thereafter we use a greedy iterative clustering technique on this transformed space to construct samples matching a desired level of diversity. Based on Twitter Firehose data, we demonstrate quantitatively that our method is robust, and performs better than other baseline techniques over a variety of trending topics. In a user study, we further show that users find samples generated by our method to be more interesting and subjectively engaging compared to techniques inspired by state-of-the-art systems, with improvements in the range of 15--45%.

As online social networks expand their role beyond maintaining existing relationships, they may look to more faceted ratings to support the formation of new connections between their users. Our study focuses on one community employing faceted ratings, CouchSurfing.org, and combines data analysis of ratings, a large-scale survey, and in-depth interviews. In order to understand the ratings, we revisit the notions of friendship and trust and uncover an asymmetry: close friendship includes trust, but high levels of trust can be achieved without close friendship. To users, providing faceted ratings presents challenges, including differentiating and quantifying inherently subjective feelings such as friendship and trust, concern over a friend's reaction to a rating, and knowledge of how ratings can affect others' reputations. One consequence of these issues is the near absence of negative feedback, even though a small portion of actual experiences and privately held ratings are negative. We show how users take this into account when formulating and interpreting ratings, and discuss designs that could encourage more balanced feedback.