@Who? Investigating Possible Errors in Studies Linking Survey and Twitter Data

Marten Appel, Nicholas Haas
{"title":"@Who? Investigating Possible Errors in Studies Linking Survey and Twitter Data","authors":"Marten Appel, Nicholas Haas","doi":"10.51685/jqd.2024.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n\n\nExpanding global usage of social media and growing questions about its societal impact have led scholars to investigate the relationship between individuals' offline and online behaviors and characteristics. Such inquiries, which compare individuals' survey responses to their social media behavior, typically do not address whether the elicitation of survey respondents' social media information introduces any systematic errors. However, making inferences from a survey-linked sample to a social media platform, and finally to a survey sample or broader target population, can be imperiled when systematic differences exist between those who provide and those who deny researchers access to their social media accounts. In this paper, we ask: Do survey respondents who say they use Twitter differ from the subset providing validated Twitter handles, as well as from the overall survey sample? Pooling across five datasets and over 31,000 respondents, we show first that samples of stated Twitter users differ from the initial survey samples from which they are drawn on several socio-demographic characteristics. Second and reassuringly as concerns possible errors due to survey-linkage, we report few systematic differences between those who say they use Twitter and those who provide validated Twitter handles. Nevertheless, we do document differences on some demographics, and we illustrate how errors could carry potential consequences for sample composition of which researchers should be aware. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of our results, their possible generalizability, and areas for future research.\n\n\n","PeriodicalId":93587,"journal":{"name":"Journal of quantitative description: digital media","volume":"91 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of quantitative description: digital media","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2024.002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Expanding global usage of social media and growing questions about its societal impact have led scholars to investigate the relationship between individuals' offline and online behaviors and characteristics. Such inquiries, which compare individuals' survey responses to their social media behavior, typically do not address whether the elicitation of survey respondents' social media information introduces any systematic errors. However, making inferences from a survey-linked sample to a social media platform, and finally to a survey sample or broader target population, can be imperiled when systematic differences exist between those who provide and those who deny researchers access to their social media accounts. In this paper, we ask: Do survey respondents who say they use Twitter differ from the subset providing validated Twitter handles, as well as from the overall survey sample? Pooling across five datasets and over 31,000 respondents, we show first that samples of stated Twitter users differ from the initial survey samples from which they are drawn on several socio-demographic characteristics. Second and reassuringly as concerns possible errors due to survey-linkage, we report few systematic differences between those who say they use Twitter and those who provide validated Twitter handles. Nevertheless, we do document differences on some demographics, and we illustrate how errors could carry potential consequences for sample composition of which researchers should be aware. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of our results, their possible generalizability, and areas for future research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
@谁?调查将调查数据和 Twitter 数据联系起来的研究中可能存在的错误
社交媒体在全球范围内的使用不断扩大,对其社会影响的质疑也越来越多,这促使学者们开始研究个人线下和线上行为及特征之间的关系。这些研究将个人的调查回答与他们的社交媒体行为进行比较,通常不会涉及调查对象社交媒体信息的获取是否会带来任何系统误差。然而,如果在提供和拒绝研究人员访问其社交媒体账户的受访者之间存在系统性差异,那么从与调查相关的样本到社交媒体平台,最后到调查样本或更广泛的目标人群的推论就会受到影响。在本文中,我们将提出以下问题:自称使用 Twitter 的调查对象与提供有效 Twitter 手柄的子集以及总体调查样本是否存在差异?通过汇总五个数据集和超过 31,000 名受访者,我们首先发现,自称 Twitter 用户的样本在多个社会人口特征方面与最初的调查样本存在差异。其次,令人欣慰的是,考虑到调查关联可能造成的误差,我们报告称使用 Twitter 的用户与提供有效 Twitter 地址的用户之间几乎没有系统性差异。尽管如此,我们还是记录了一些人口统计学特征上的差异,并说明了误差可能对样本构成造成的潜在后果,研究人员应对此有所了解。最后,我们讨论了我们的结果、其可能的普遍性以及未来的研究领域。
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
#Asylum: How Syrian Refugees Engage with Online Information Who Does(n't) Target You? A Dataset for The Study of Online Radicalization Through Incel Forum Archives Detecting Misinformation: Identifying False News Spread by Political Leaders in the Global South @Who? Investigating Possible Errors in Studies Linking Survey and Twitter Data
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1