Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3630744.3660242acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageswebsciConference Proceedingsconference-collections
extended-abstract

Validating Digital Traces with Survey Data: The Use Case of Religiosity

Published: 13 June 2024 Publication History

Abstract

This paper tests the validity of a digital trace database (Politus) obtained from Twitter, with a recently conducted representative social survey, focusing on the use case of religiosity in Turkey. Religiosity scores in the research are extracted using supervised machine learning under the Politus project. The validation analysis depends on two steps. First, we compare the performances of two alternative tweet-to-user transformation strategies, and second, test for the impact of resampling via the MRP technique. Estimates of the Politus are examined at both aggregate and region-level. The results are intriguing for future research on measuring public opinion via social media data.

References

[1]
Pablo Barberá. 2015. Birds of the same feather tweet together: Bayesian ideal point estimation using Twitter data. Political analysis 23, 1 (2015), 76–91.
[2]
Pablo Barberá, John T Jost, Jonathan Nagler, Joshua A Tucker, and Richard Bonneau. 2015. Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber?Psychological science 26, 10 (2015), 1531–1542.
[3]
Raviv Cohen and Derek Ruths. 2013. Classifying political orientation on Twitter: It’s not easy!. In Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, Vol. 7. 91–99.
[4]
Jeffrey R Lax and Justin H Phillips. 2009. How should we estimate public opinion in the states?American Journal of Political Science 53, 1 (2009), 107–121.
[5]
Lucas Leemann and Fabio Wasserfallen. 2020. Measuring attitudes–Multilevel modeling with post-stratification (MrP). The SAGE handbook of research methods in political science and international relations (2020), 371–384.
[6]
Renato Miranda Filho, Jussara M Almeida, and Gisele L Pappa. 2015. Twitter population sample bias and its impact on predictive outcomes: a case study on elections. In 2015 IEEE/ACM international conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining (ASONAM). IEEE, 1254–1261.
[7]
Alexandra Olteanu, Carlos Castillo, Fernando Diaz, and Emre Kıcıman. 2019. Social data: Biases, methodological pitfalls, and ethical boundaries. Frontiers in big data 2 (2019), 13.
[8]
David K Park, Andrew Gelman, and Joseph Bafumi. 2004. Bayesian multilevel estimation with poststratification: State-level estimates from national polls. Political Analysis 12, 4 (2004), 375–385.
[9]
Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2019. Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.10084 (2019).
[10]
Indira Sen, Fabian Floeck, Katrin Weller, Bernd Weiss, and Claudia Wagner. 2019. TED-On: A Total Error Framework for Digital Traces of Human Behavior on Online Platforms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.08228 (2019).
[11]
Luke Sloan. 2017. Who tweets in the United Kingdom? Profiling the Twitter population using the British social attitudes survey 2015. Social Media+ Society 3, 1 (2017), 2056305117698981.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
Websci Companion '24: Companion Publication of the 16th ACM Web Science Conference
May 2024
128 pages
ISBN:9798400704536
DOI:10.1145/3630744
Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 June 2024

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Twitter
  2. digital trace
  3. public opinion
  4. religiosity
  5. validation

Qualifiers

  • Extended-abstract
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Funding Sources

  • European Union?s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation programme

Conference

Websci '24
Sponsor:
Websci '24: 16th ACM Web Science Conference
May 21 - 24, 2024
Stuttgart, Germany

Acceptance Rates

Websci Companion '24 Paper Acceptance Rate 27 of 58 submissions, 47%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 245 of 933 submissions, 26%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 24
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)24
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media