Paper detail

Characterizing Collective Attention via Descriptor Context: A Case Study of Public Discussions of Crisis Events

Social media datasets make it possible to rapidly quantify collective attention to emerging topics and breaking news, such as crisis events. Collective attention is typically measured by aggregate counts, such as the number of posts that mention a name or hashtag. But according to rationalist models of natural language communication, the collective salience of each entity will be expressed not only in how often it is mentioned, but in the form that those mentions take. This is because natural language communication is premised on (and customized to) the expectations that speakers and writers have about how their messages will be interpreted by the intended audience. We test this idea by conducting a large-scale analysis of public online discussions of breaking news events on Facebook and Twitter, focusing on five recent crisis events. We examine how people refer to locations, focusing specifically on contextual descriptors, such as "San Juan" versus "San Juan, Puerto Rico." Rationalist accounts of natural language communication predict that such descriptors will be unnecessary (and therefore omitted) when the named entity is expected to have high prior salience to the reader. We find that the use of contextual descriptors is indeed associated with proxies for social and informational expectations, including macro-level factors like the location's global salience and micro-level factors like audience engagement. We also find a consistent decrease in descriptor context use over the lifespan of each crisis event. These findings provide evidence about how social media users communicate with their audiences, and point towards more fine-grained models of collective attention that may help researchers and crisis response organizations to better understand public perception of unfolding crisis events.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.