Knowledge and Smart Technology (KST) 2012
DOI: 10.1109/kst.2012.6287736
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A combined semantic social network analysis framework to integrate social media data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There are, in fact, several ontologies developed to account for interactions on social media, situated, for the most part, situated in the context of either semantic web engineering social media data analytics (Mika, 2004). They are focused on providing formalisms that aid the analysis of platform connectivity structures between SNS users (Golbeck & Rothstein, 2008), sentiment analysis (Kumar & Joshi, 2017;Thakor & Sasi, 2015), influence (Razis & Anagnostopoulos, 2014), social network analysis (Pankong et al, 2012), user activities (Rosenberger et al, 2015) and product recommendations on SNS (Villanueva et al, 2016). Additionally, different ontologies draw from practical argumentation theories (e.g., Mann & Thompson, 1988;Toulmin, 1958;Walton, 2006) to account for the argumentation structure in social media conversations (for a survey, see Schneider et al, 2013).…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There are, in fact, several ontologies developed to account for interactions on social media, situated, for the most part, situated in the context of either semantic web engineering social media data analytics (Mika, 2004). They are focused on providing formalisms that aid the analysis of platform connectivity structures between SNS users (Golbeck & Rothstein, 2008), sentiment analysis (Kumar & Joshi, 2017;Thakor & Sasi, 2015), influence (Razis & Anagnostopoulos, 2014), social network analysis (Pankong et al, 2012), user activities (Rosenberger et al, 2015) and product recommendations on SNS (Villanueva et al, 2016). Additionally, different ontologies draw from practical argumentation theories (e.g., Mann & Thompson, 1988;Toulmin, 1958;Walton, 2006) to account for the argumentation structure in social media conversations (for a survey, see Schneider et al, 2013).…”
Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The pervasive spread of social networks has prompted researchers to study the behavior of users who join social networks in various reference contexts [27][28][29]. Alongside the analysis of the structure of networks, which already provides very interesting knowledge patterns about the behavior of users accessing them, researchers have also begun to examine the content posted and exchanged between users [30][31][32][33]. Regarding the latter, elements of particular interest to them are the extraction of topics from texts and the assessment of the sentiment that users have about a given topic.…”
Section: Related Literature 21 Prefacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proposed framework is abstract and does not allow deriving the related data of the activities. Pankong et al's [18] ontology for social activities is more concrete. In principle, the ontology is an entity-relationship-model, which shows entities (e.g.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research on user activities in social media is contemporary and there are a number of existing conceptualisations [17][18][19]22]. These are valuable to understand the user's motivation of being active and show some features of social media.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%