Limiting Tags Fosters Efficiency
Pages 46 - 55
Abstract
Tagging facilitates information retrieval in social media and other online communities by allowing users to organize and describe online content. Researchers found that the efficiency of tagging systems steadily decreases over time, because tags become less precise in identifying specific documents, i.e., they lose their descriptiveness. However, previous works did not answer how or even whether community managers can improve the efficiency of tags. In this work, we use information-theoretic measures to track the descriptive and retrieval efficiency of tags on Stack Overflow, a question-answering system that strictly limits the number of tags users can specify per question. We observe that tagging efficiency stabilizes over time, while tag content and descriptiveness both increase. To explain this observation, we hypothesize that limiting the number of tags fosters novelty and diversity in tag usage, two properties which are both beneficial for tagging efficiency. To provide qualitative evidence supporting our hypothesis, we present a statistical model of tagging that demonstrates how novelty and diversity lead to greater tag efficiency in the long run. Our work offers insights into policies to improve information organization and retrieval in online communities.
Supplementary Material
Limiting Tags Fosters Efficiency
- Download
- 11.17 MB
References
[1]
M. Ahasanuzzaman, M. Asaduzzaman, C.K. Roy, and K.A. Schneider. 2016. Mining Duplicate Questions in Stack Overflow. In MSR.
[2]
R. Awawdeh and T. Anderson. 2010. Improving Search in Tag-Based Systems with Automatically Extracted Keywords. In Knowledge Science, Engineering and Management.
[3]
E. Bagheri and F. Ensan. 2016. Semantic Tagging and Linking of Software Engineering Social Content. Automated Software Engineering(2016).
[4]
A.-L. Barabási and R. Albert. 1999. Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks. Science (1999).
[5]
I. Cantador, I. Konstas, and J. Jose. 2011. Categorising Social Tags to Improve Folksonomy-based Recommendations. Journal of Web Semantics(2011).
[6]
C. Cattuto, D. Benz, A. Hotho, and G. Stumme. 2008. Semantic Grounding of Tag Relatedness in Social Bookmarking Systems. In ISWC.
[7]
Y. Chen, J. Alsakran, S. Barlowe, J. Yang, and Y. Zhao. 2011. Supporting effective common ground construction in Asynchronous Collaborative Visual Analytics. In VAST.
[8]
E. Chi. 2008. Information Seeking can be Social. Information Seeking Support Systems(2008).
[9]
E. Chi and T. Mytkowicz. 2008. Understanding the Efficiency of Social Tagging Systems using Information Theory. In ICWSM.
[10]
P. de Meo, E. Ferrara, F. Abel, L. Aroyo, and G.-J. Houben. 2014. Analyzing User Behavior across Social Sharing Environments. ACM TIST (2014).
[11]
D. Dimitrov, D. Helic, and M. Strohmaier. 2018. Tag-based Navigation and Visualization. In Social Information Access.
[12]
M. Enrich, M. Braunhofer, and F. Ricci. 2013. Cold-start Management with Cross-Domain Collaborative Filtering and Tags. In ECWT.
[13]
G.W. Furnas, C. Fake, L. Ahn, J. Schachter, S. Golder, K. Fox, M. Davis, C. Marlow, and M. Naaman. 2006. Why Do Tagging Systems Work?. In CHI.
[14]
K. Gligorić, A. Anderson, and R. West. 2018. How Constraints Affect Content: The Case of Twitter’s Switch from 140 to 280 Characters. In ICWSM.
[15]
S.A. Golder and B.A. Huberman. 2006. Usage patterns of collaborative tagging systems. Journal of Information Science(2006).
[16]
H. S. Heaps. 1978. Information Retrieval: Computational and Theoretical Aspects. Academic Press, Inc.
[17]
D. Helic and M. Strohmaier. 2011. Building Directories for Social Tagging Systems. In CIKM.
[18]
D. Helic, C. Trattner, M. Strohmaier, and K. Andrews. 2010. On the Navigability of Social Tagging Systems. In ICSC.
[19]
P. Heymann, A. Paepcke, and H. Garcia-Molina. 2010. Tagging Human Knowledge. In WSDM.
[20]
P. Heymann, D. Ramage, and H. Garcia-Molina. 2008. Social Tag Prediction. In SIGIR.
[21]
A. Hotho, R. Jäschke, C. Schmitz, and G. Stumme. 2006. Information Retrieval in Folksonomies: Search and Ranking. In The Semantic Web: Research and Applications.
[22]
F. Jabeen, S. Khusro, A. Majid, and A. Rauf. 2014. Semantics Discovery in Social Tagging Systems: A Review. Multimedia Tools & Applications(2014).
[23]
Y. Kammerer, R. Nairn, P. Pirolli, and E. Chi. 2009. Signpost from the Masses: Learning Effects in an Exploratory Social Tag Search Browser. In CHI.
[24]
A. Klašnja-Milićević, M. Ivanović, B. Vesin, and Z. Budimac. 2018. Enhancing E-Learning Systems with Personalized Recommendation Based On Collaborative Tagging Techniques. Applied Intelligence(2018).
[25]
J.M. Kleinberg, R. Kumar, P. Raghavan, S. Rajagopalan, and A.S. Tomkins. 1999. The Web as a Graph: Measurements, Models, and Methods. In Computing and Combinatorics.
[26]
C. Körner, D. Benz, A. Hotho, M. Strohmaier, and G. Stumme. 2010. Stop Thinking, Start Tagging: Tag Semantics Emerge from Collaborative Verbosity. In WWW.
[27]
D. Kowald, S.C. Pujari, and E. Lex. 2017. Temporal Effects on Hashtag Reuse in Twitter: A Cognitive-Inspired Hashtag Recommendation Approach. In WWW.
[28]
R. Krestel, P. Fankhauser, and W. Nejdl. 2009. Latent Dirichlet Allocation for Tag Recommendation. In RecSys.
[29]
T. Ley and P. Seitlinger. 2015. Dynamics of Human Categorization in a Collaborative Tagging System: How Social Processes of Semantic Stabilization Shape Individual Sensemaking. Computers in Human Behavior(2015).
[30]
Y.-L. Lin, C. Trattner, P. Brusilovsky, and D. He. 2015. The Impact of Image Descriptions on User Tagging Behavior: A Study of the Nature and Functionality of Crowdsourced Tags. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (2015).
[31]
L. Mamykina, A.D. Miller, C. Grevet, Y. Medynskiy, M.A. Terry, E.D. Mynatt, and P.R. Davidson. 2011. Examining the Impact of Collaborative Tagging on Sensemaking in Nutrition Management. In CHI.
[32]
B. Markines, C. Cattuto, F. Menczer, D. Benz, A. Hotho, and G. Stumme. 2009. Evaluating Similarity Measures for Emergent Semantics of Social Tagging. In WWW.
[33]
K. Mendes, J. Ringrose, and J. Keller. 2018. #MeToo and the Promise and Pitfalls of Challenging Rape Culture Through Digital Feminist Activism. European Journal of Women’s Studies(2018).
[34]
R. Miotto and C. Weng. 2013. Unsupervised Mining of Frequent Tags for Clinical Eligibility Text Indexing. Journal of Biomedical Informatics(2013).
[35]
M.E.J. Newman. 2005. Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf’s law. Contemporary Physics(2005).
[36]
A. Olteanu, I. Weber, and D. Gatica-Perez. 2016. Characterizing the Demographics Behind the #BlackLivesMatter Movement. In AAAI Spring Symposium Series.
[37]
C. Schmitz, A. Hotho, R. Jäschke, and G. Stumme. 2006. Mining Association Rules in Folksonomies. In Data Science and Classification.
[38]
M.V. Simkin and V.P. Roychowdhury. 2011. Re-inventing Willis. Physics Reports (2011).
[39]
C. Trattner, D. Kowald, P. Seitlinger, T. Ley, and S. Kopeinik. 2016. Modeling Activation Processes in Human Memory to Predict the Use of Tags in Social Bookmarking Systems. The Journal of Web Science(2016).
[40]
F. Tria, V. Loreto, V.D.P. Servedio, and S.H. Strogatz. 2013. The dynamics of correlated novelties.CoRR (2013).
[41]
W. Willett, J. Heer, J. Hellerstein, and M. Agrawala. 2011. CommentSpace: Structured Support for Collaborative Visual Analysis. In CHI.
[42]
H. Xie, Q. Li, X. Mao, X. Li, Y. Cai, and Y. Rao. 2014. Community-aware User Profile Enrichment in Folksonomy. Neural Networks (2014).
[43]
G.U. Yule. 1925. A Mathematical Theory of Evolution, Based on the Conclusions of Dr. Willis. Transactions of the Royal Society of London(1925).
[44]
Y. Zhang. 2019. Language in Our Time: An Empirical Analysis of Hashtags. In WWW.
[45]
Z.-K. Zhang, T. Zhou, and Y.-C. Zhang. 2011. Tag-aware Recommender Systems: A State-of-the-art Survey. Journal of Computer Science and Technology(2011).
[46]
A. Zubiaga, C. Körner, and M. Strohmaier. 2011. Tags vs Shelves: From Social Tagging to Social Classification. In HT.
[47]
Yi Zuo, J. Zeng, M. Gong, and L. Jiao. 2016. Tag-aware Recommender Systems Based On Deep Neural Networks. Neurocomputing (2016).
Recommendations
Social tags: meaning and suggestions
CIKM '08: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Information and knowledge managementThis paper aims to quantify two common assumptions about social tagging: (1) that tags are "meaningful" and (2) that the tagging process is influenced by tag suggestions. For (1), we analyze the semantic properties of tags and the relationship between ...
Identifying Tags Describing Image Contents
HT '19: Proceedings of the 30th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social MediaOn many photo-sharing social media, e.g., Instagram, a user posting a photo can add tags, i.e., words describing it. Tags are used for keyword-based image search. Some tags, however, describe not image contents but some metadata, e.g., camera names. We ...
Concept-Level Multimodal Ranking of Flickr Photo Tags via Recall Based Weighting
MMCommons '16: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Workshop on Multimedia COMMONSSocial media platforms allow users to annotate photos with tags that significantly facilitate an effective semantics understanding, search, and retrieval of photos. However, due to the manual, ambiguous, and personalized nature of user tagging, many ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2021
328 pages
ISBN:9781450383301
DOI:10.1145/3447535
Copyright © 2021 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 22 June 2021
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
WebSci '21
Sponsor:
WebSci '21: WebSci '21 13th ACM Web Science Conference 2021
June 21 - 25, 2021
Virtual Event, United Kingdom
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 245 of 933 submissions, 26%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 305Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)135
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)34
Reflects downloads up to 25 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in