Abstract
This chapter provides an overview of the history and benefits of big social research, then explores six key issues in big social research—context, data quality and trustworthiness, data comparability, informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, and intellectual property and data ownership. The chapter then outlines data curation implications of these issues, including data curation practices that could help alleviate some aspects of the issues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
141 Supreme Court Reporter (2021) Van Buren v. United States
938 Federal Reporter 3rd (2019) hiQ Labs, Inc v. LinkedIn Corporation
Acker A, Kriesberg A (2017) Tweets may be archived: civic engagement, digital preservation and Obama White House social media data. Proc Assoc Info Sci Tech 54:1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2017.14505401001
Altman I (1977) Privacy regulation: culturally universal or culturally specific? J Soc Issues 33:66–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1977.tb01883.x
Anderson C (2008) The end of theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired
Anderson J, Christen K (2022) Local contexts: grounding Indigenous rights. https://web.archive.org/web/20220423194347/https://localcontexts.org/. Accessed 25 Apr 2022
Andrejevic M (2014) Big data, big questions: the big data divide. Inte J Commun 8:17. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/2161
Barad K (2003) Posthumanist performativity: toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: J Women Culture Soc 28:801–831. https://doi.org/10.1086/345321
Baram-Tsabari A, Segev E, Sharon AJ (2017) What’s new? The applications of data mining and big data in the social sciences. The Sage handbook of online research methods. Sage Publications, London, UK, pp 92–106
Barhorst JB, McLean G, Brooks J, Wilson A (2019) Everyday micro-influencers and their impact on corporate brand reputation. In: Proceedings of the 21st ICIG symposium. Durham, England
Bechmann A, Vahlstrup PB (2015) Studying Facebook and Instagram data: the Digital Footprints software. First Monday 20.https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i12.5968
Beguerisse-Díaz M, McLennan AK, Garduño-Hernández G, Barahona M, Ulijaszek SJ (2017) The ‘who’ and ‘what’ of #diabetes on Twitter. Digital Health 3.https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207616688841
Ben-David A, Huurdeman H (2014) Web archive search as research: methodological and theoretical implications. Alexandria 25:93–111. https://doi.org/10.7227/ALX.0022
Bishop L, Gray D (2018) Chapter 7: Ethical challenges of publishing and sharing social media research data. In: Woodfield K (ed) The ethics of online research, 1st edn. Emerald Publishing, Bingley, pp 159–188
Blank J (2018) IP law in the age of social media. Northeastern University Graduate Programs
Bond RM, Fariss CJ, Jones JJ, Kramer ADI, Marlow C, Settle JE, Fowler JH (2012) A 61-million-person experiment in social influence and political mobilization. Nature 489:295–298. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11421
Bosher H, Yeşiloğlu S (2019) An analysis of the fundamental tensions between copyright and social media: the legal implications of sharing images on Instagram. Int Rev Law Comput Technol 33:164–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600869.2018.1475897
Bossetta M (2018) The digital architectures of social media: comparing political campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. election. Journalism Mass Commun Quart 95:471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307
Boyd d (2013) Bibliography of research on Twitter & microblogging. https://web.archive.org/web/20191123145930/https://www.danah.org/researchBibs/twitter.php. Accessed 23 Nov 2019
Boyd d, Crawford K (2012) Critical questions for big data: provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Inf Commun Soc 15:662–679.https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
Bright J (2017) ‘Big social science’: doing big data in the social sciences. In: Fielding NG, Lee RM, Blank G (eds) The Sage handbook of online research methods. Sage Publications, London, UK, pp 125–139
Bruns A (2019) After the ‘APIcalypse’: social media platforms and their fight against critical scholarly research. Inf Commun Soc 22:1544–1566. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1637447
Bruns A (2013) Faster than the speed of print: reconciling ‘big data’ social media analysis and academic scholarship. First Monday 18.https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v18i10.4879
Bruns A, Weller K (2016) Twitter as a first draft of the present: and the challenges of preserving it for the future. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on web science. Association for computing machinery, hannover, Germany, pp 183–189
Buchanan E (2017) Internet research ethics: twenty years later. In: Zimmer M, Kinder-Kurlanda K (eds) Internet research ethics for the social age: new challenges, cases, and contexts. Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp xxix–xxxiii
Burgess J, Bruns A (2012) Twitter archives and the challenges of “big social data” for media and communication research. M/C Journal 15.https://doi.org/10.5204/mcj.561
Cappella JN (2017) Vectors into the future of mass and interpersonal communication research: big data, social media, and computational social science. Hum Commun Res 43:545–558. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12114
Cavazos-Rehg PA, Krauss M, Fisher SL, Salyer P, Grucza RA, Bierut LJ (2015) Twitter chatter about marijuana. J Adolesc Health 56:139–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2014.10.270
Chang RM, Kauffman RJ, Kwon Y (2014) Understanding the paradigm shift to computational social science in the presence of big data. Decis Support Syst 63:67–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.08.008
Christen K, Merrill A, Wynne M (2017) A community of relations: Mukurtu hubs and spokes. D-Lib Magazine 23.https://doi.org/10.1045/may2017-christen
Chu K-H, Colditz J, Sidani J, Zimmer M, Primack B (2021) Re-evaluating standards of human subjects protection for sensitive health data in social media networks. Social Netw 67:41–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2019.10.010
Clark K, Duckham M, Guillemin M, Hunter A, McVernon J, O’Keefe C, Pitkin C, Prawer S, Sinnott R, Warr D, Waycott J (2019) Advancing the ethical use of digital data in human research: challenges and strategies to promote ethical practice. Ethics Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-018-9490-4
Colleoni E, Rozza A, Arvidsson A (2014) Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. J Commun 64:317–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12084
Colombo GB, Burnap P, Hodorog A, Scourfield J (2016) Analysing the connectivity and communication of suicidal users on Twitter. Comput Commun 73:291–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2015.07.018
Cooky C, Linabary JR, Corple DJ (2018) Navigating big data dilemmas: feminist holistic reflexivity in social media research. Big Data Soc 5:2053951718807731. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718807731
Croeser S, Highfield T (2020) Blended data: Critiquing and complementing social media datasets, big and small. In: Hunsinger J, Allen MM, Klastrup L (eds) Second international handbook of internet research. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, pp 669–690
DDI Alliance (2022) Data Documentation Initiative. https://web.archive.org/web/20220202185335/https://ddialliance.org/
DocNow (2020) Documenting the Now. https://web.archive.org/web/20220419155938/https://www.docnow.io/. Accessed 22 Feb 2020
Doft D (2015) Facebook, Twitter, and the Wild West of IP enforcement on social media: weighing the merits of a uniform dispute resolution policy. J Marshall L Rev 49:959
Dolin-Mescal A (2018) Social humans. https://web.archive.org/web/20220208021334/https://www.docnow.io/social-humans/
Driscoll K, Walker S (2014) Working within a black box: transparency in the collection and production of big Twitter data. Int J Commun 8:20
EFF (2014) Unintended consequences: sixteen years under the DMCA. In: Electronic frontier foundation. https://web.archive.org/web/20220702055813/https://www.eff.org/wp/unintended-consequences-16-years-under-dmca
Ellison N, Heino R, Gibbs J (2006) Managing impressions online: self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. J Comput-Mediat Commun 11:415–441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
Fan W, Gordon MD (2014) The power of social media analytics. Commun ACM 57:74–81. https://doi.org/10.1145/2602574
Fiesler C, Dye M, Feuston JL, Hiruncharoenvate C, Hutto CJ, Morrison S, Khanipour Roshan P, Pavalanathan U, Bruckman AS, De Choudhury M, Gilbert E (2017) What (or who) is public? Privacy settings and social media content sharing. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing. ACM, Portland, OR, pp 567–580
Fiesler C, Proferes N (2018) “Participant” perceptions of Twitter research ethics. Social Media + Society 4:205630511876336. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118763366
Franzke AS, Bechmann A, Ess CM, Zimmer M (2020) Internet research: ethical guidelines 3.0. AoIR (The International Association of Internet Researchers)
Ghermandi A, Sinclair M (2019) Passive crowdsourcing of social media in environmental research: a systematic map. Glob Environ Chang 55:36–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.02.003
Goffman E (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday Anchor Books, New York, NY
Golder S, Scantlebury A, Christmas H (2019) Understanding public attitudes toward researchers using social media for detecting and monitoring adverse events data: multi methods study. J Med Internet Res 21:e7081. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7081
González-Bailón S (2013) Social science in the era of big data. Policy Internet 5:147–160. https://doi.org/10.1002/1944-2866.POI328
Greene T, Shmueli G, Ray S, Fell J (2019) Adjusting to the GDPR: the impact on data scientists and behavioral researchers. Big Data 7:140–162. https://doi.org/10.1089/big.2018.0176
Halavais A (2015) Bigger sociological imaginations: framing big social data theory and methods. Inf Commun Soc 18:583–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2015.1008543
Hargittai E (2020) Potential biases in big data: omitted voices on social media. Soc Sci Comput Rev 38:10–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318788322
Hemphill L, Leonard SH, Hedstrom M (2018) Developing a social media archive at ICPSR. In: Web Archiving and Digital Libraries (WADL). Fort Worth, TX
Henderson KA, Spinello RA, Lipinski TA (2007) Prudent policy? Reassessing the digital millennium copyright act. SIGCAS Comput Soc 37:25–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/1327325.1327327
Hogan B (2010) The presentation of self in the age of social media: distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bull Sci Technol Soc 30:377–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893
Hökby S, Hadlaczky G, Westerlund J, Wasserman D, Balazs J, Germanavicius A, Machín N, Meszaros G, Sarchiapone M, Värnik A, Varnik P, Westerlund M, Carli V (2016) Are mental health effects of internet use attributable to the web-based content or perceived consequences of usage? A longitudinal study of European adolescents. JMIR Mental Health 3:e31. https://doi.org/10.2196/mental.5925
Holland J, Thomson R, Henderson S, London South Bank University, Families & Social Capital ESRC Research Group (2006) Qualitative longitudinal research: a discussion paper. London South Bank University, London, UK
Hutton L, Henderson T (2013) An architecture for ethical and privacy-sensitive social network experiments. SIGMETRICS Perform Evaluat Rev 40:90–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/2479942.2479954
Ito M (2008) Introduction. In: Varnelis K (ed) Networked publics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 1–14
Jendryke M, Balz T, McClure SC, Liao M (2017) Putting people in the picture: combining big location-based social media data and remote sensing imagery for enhanced contextual urban information in Shanghai. Comput Environ Urban Syst 62:99–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2016.10.004
Jules B, Summers E, Mitchell VJr (2018) Ethical considerations for archiving social media content generated by contemporary social movements: challenges, opportunities, and recommendations. Documenting the Now White Paper. https://web.archive.org/web/20220316220447/https://www.docnow.io/docs/docnow-whitepaper-2018.pdf
Kinder-Kurlanda K, Weller K, Zenk-Möltgen W, Pfeffer J, Morstatter F (2017) Archiving information from geotagged tweets to promote reproducibility and comparability in social media research. Big Data Soc, 4.https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717736336
King G, Persily N (2020) A new model for industry–academic partnerships. PS: Polit Sci Polit 53:703–709. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096519001021
Kirkegaard EOW, Bjerrekær JD (2016) The OKCupid dataset: a very large public dataset of dating site users. Open Differ Psychol
Kitchin R (2014) Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data Soc, 1.https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714528481
Kramer ADI, Guillory JE, Hancock JT (2014) Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:8788–8790. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111
Lanchester J (2017) You are the product. London Review of Books 39
Latour B (2007) Beware, your imagination leaves digital traces. Times Higher Literary Suppl 6:129–131
Lazer D, Pentland A, Adamic L, Aral S, Barabasi A-L, Brewer D, Christakis N, Contractor N, Fowler J, Gutmann M, Jebara T, King G, Macy M, Roy D, Van Alstyne M (2009) Computational social science. Science 323:721–723. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1167742
Lee TB (2006) Circumventing competition: the perverse consequences of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. Policy Analysis
Lewis K, Kaufman J, Gonzalez M, Wimmer A, Christakis N (2008) Tastes, ties, and time: a new social network dataset using Facebook.com. Soc Netw 30:330–342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2008.07.002
Lorentzen DG, Nolin J (2017) Approaching completeness: capturing a hashtagged Twitter conversation and its follow-on conversation. Soc Sci Comput Rev 35:277–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439315607018
Madden M (2014) Public perceptions of privacy and security in the post-Snowden era. Pew Research Center
Mannheimer S, Hull EA (2018) Sharing selves: developing an ethical framework for curating social media data. Int J Digit Curation 12:196–209. https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v12i2.518
Manovich L (2012) Trending: the promises and the challenges of big social data. In: Gold MK (ed) Debates in the digital humanities. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN, pp 460–475
Markham A (2012) Fabrication as ethical practice. Inf Commun Soc 15:334–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2011.641993
Martí P, Serrano-Estrada L, Nolasco-Cirugeda A (2019) Social media data: challenges, opportunities and limitations in urban studies. Comput Environ Urban Syst 74:161–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.11.001
Marwick AE, Boyd D (2014) Networked privacy: how teenagers negotiate context in social media. New Media Soc 16:1051–1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814543995
Marwick AE, Boyd D (2011) I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media Soc 13:114–133.https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
Mathur A, Bleckman JD, Lyle J (2017) Reuse of restricted-use research data. Curating research data, volume two: a handbook of current practice. Association of College and Research Libraries, Chicago, IL, pp 258–261
McCook AA (2016) Publicly available data on thousands of OKCupid users pulled over copyright claim. In: Retraction watch. https://retractionwatch.com/2016/05/16/publicly-available-data-on-thousands-of-okcupid-users-pulled-over-copyright-claim/. Accessed 28 Apr 2022
McKee R (2013) Ethical issues in using social media for health and health care research. Health Policy 110:298–301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2013.02.006
McRory W (2021) Let the bots be bots: why the CFAA must be clarified to prevent the selective banning of data collection facilitating private social media information monopolization. Brooklyn J Corporate Financ Commer Law 16:279
Metcalf J (2016) Big data analytics and revision of the common rule. Commun ACM 59:31–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/2935882
Metcalf J, Crawford K (2016) Where are human subjects in big data research? The emerging ethics divide. Big Data Soc, 3.https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716650211
Moorhead SA, Hazlett DE, Harrison L, Carroll JK, Irwin A, Hoving C (2013) A new dimension of health care: systematic review of the uses, benefits, and limitations of social media for health communication. J Med Internet Res 15:e85. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.1933
Moreno JL (1934) Who shall survive?: A new approach to the problem of human interrelations. Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Co, Washington, DC
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979) The belmont report. united states department of health, education, and welfare
Neale B, Bishop L (2012) The Timescapes Archive: a stakeholder approach to archiving qualitative longitudinal data. Qual Res 12:53–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111426233
Nebeker C, Dunseath SE, Linares-Orozco R (2020) A retrospective analysis of NIH-funded digital health research using social media platforms. Digital Health.https://doi.org/10.1177/2055207619901085
Nippert-Eng CE (2010) Islands of privacy. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL
Nissenbaum H (2009) Privacy in context: technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA
Obar JA, Oeldorf-Hirsch A (2020) The biggest lie on the internet: ignoring the privacy policies and terms of service policies of social networking services. Inf Commun Soc 23:128–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1486870
Oboler A, Welsh K, Cruz L (2012) The danger of big data: social media as computational social science. First Monday 17.https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v17i7.3993
Osterberg G (2017) Update on the Twitter archive at the Library of Congress. In: Library of congress blog. https://web.archive.org/web/20220405174129/https://blogs.loc.gov/loc/2017/12/update-on-the-twitter-archive-at-the-library-of-congress-2/
Palen L, Dourish P (2003) Unpacking “privacy” for a networked world. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. association for computing machinery, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA, pp 129–136
Pasquetto IV, Borgman CL, Wofford MF (2019) Uses and reuses of scientific data: the data creators’ advantage. Harvard Data Sci Rev, 1. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.fc14bf2d
Paul M, Dredze M (2011) You are what you tweet: analyzing twitter for public health. Proceedings of the international AAAI conference on web and social media 5:265–272. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14137
Petronio SS (2002) Boundaries of privacy: dialectics of disclosure. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
Proferes N (2017) Reaction to Cornelius Puschmann. In: Kinder-Kurlanda K, Zimmer M (eds) Internet research ethics for the social age. Peter Lang, New York, NY, p 114
Prom CJ (2017) Social feed manager guide for building social media archives. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Puschmann C (2017) Bad judgment, bad ethics? Validity in computational social media research. In: Zimmer M, Kinder-Kurlanda K (eds) Internet research ethics for the social age. Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp 95–113
Puschmann C (2019) An end to the Wild West of social media research: a response to Axel Bruns. Inf Commun Soc 22:1582–1589. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1646300
Puschmann C, Burgess J (2014) The politics of Twitter data. In: Weller K, Bruns A, Burgess J, Puschmann C, Mahrt M (eds) Twitter and society. Peter Lang, New York, NY, pp 43–54
Rains SA, Brunner SR (2015) What can we learn about social network sites by studying Facebook? A call and recommendations for research on social network sites. New Media Soc 17:114–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444814546481
Reuter K, Zhu Y, Angyan P, Le N, Merchant AA, Zimmer M (2019) Public concern about monitoring Twitter users and their conversations to recruit for clinical trials: survey study. J Med Internet Res 21:e15455. https://doi.org/10.2196/15455
Rivers CM, Lewis BL (2014) Ethical research standards in a world of big data. F1000 Research 3:38. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.3-38.v2
Ruthven I, Buchanan S, Jardine C (2018) Relationships, environment, health and development: the information needs expressed online by young first-time mothers. J Am Soc Inf Sci 69:985–995. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24024
Salganik MJ (2018) Bit by bit: social research in the digital age. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ
Schema.org (2020) Data and datasets. https://web.archive.org/web/20211215014211/https://schema.org/docs/data-and-datasets.html
Schneble CO, Elger BS, Shaw D (2018) The Cambridge Analytica affair and internet-mediated research. EMBO reports 19:e46579. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.201846579
Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (2013) Considerations and recommendations concerning internet research and human subjects research regulations, with revisions
Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Human Research Protections (2015) Attachment A: human subjects research implications of “big data”
Segerberg A, Bennett WL (2011) Social media and the organization of collective action: using Twitter to explore the ecologies of two climate change protests. Commun Rev 14:197–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2011.597250
Shah DV, Cappella JN, Neuman WR (2015) Big data, digital media, and computational social science: possibilities and perils. Ann Am Acad Pol Soc Sci 659:6–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716215572084
Shilton K, Sayles S (2016) “We aren’t all going to be on the same page about ethics”: ethical practices and challenges in research on digital and social media. In: 49th Hawaii international conference on system sciences (HICSS). IEEE, Koloa, HI, pp 1909–1918
Sieber JE (1991) Sharing social science data: advantages and challenges. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA
Simmel G (1955) Conflict and the web of group affiliations. The Free Press, New York, NY
Sleeper M, Balebako R, Das S, McConahy AL, Wiese J, Cranor LF (2013) The post that wasn’t: exploring self-censorship on Facebook. In: Proceedings of the 2013 conference on computer supported cooperative work—CSCW ’13. ACM Press, San Antonio, Texas, USA, p 793
Sloan L (2016) Social science ‘lite’? Deriving demographic proxies from Twitter. The Sage handbook of social media research methods. Sage Publications, London, UK, pp 90–104
Stier S, Breuer J, Siegers P, Thorson K (2020) Integrating survey data and digital trace data: Key issues in developing an emerging field. Soc Sci Comput Rev 38:503–516. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439319843669
Stoycheff E, Liu J, Wibowo KA, Nanni DP (2017) What have we learned about social media by studying Facebook? A decade in review. New Media Soc 19:968–980. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444817695745
Sujon Z (2017) Reaction to tromble and stockmann. In: Kinder-Kurlanda K, Zimmer M (eds) Internet research ethics for the social age. Peter Lang, New York, NY
Taylor J, Pagliari C (2018) Mining social media data: how are research sponsors and researchers addressing the ethical challenges? Research Ethics 14:1–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117738559
The Economist (2022) Your secret’s safe with me; Data privacy. The Economist, 62–63
Thomson SD (2016) Preserving social media. Digital Preservation Coalition Technology Watch Report.https://doi.org/10.7207/twr16-01
Törnberg P, Törnberg A (2018) The limits of computation: a philosophical critique of contemporary big data research. Big Data Soc 5:2053951718811843. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718811843
Twitter (2023a) Compliance Firehouse API: honoring user intent on Twitter. In: Twitter developer platform. https://web.archive.org/web/20230329190341/https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/twitter-api/enterprise/compliance-firehose-api/guides/honoring-user-intent
Twitter (2023b) Developer policy: content redistribution. https://web.archive.org/web/20230403102334/https://developer.twitter.com/en/developer-terms/policy
Twitter (2023c) Developer terms: more about restricted uses of the Twitter APIs. https://web.archive.org/web/20230401142538/https://developer.twitter.com/en/developer-terms/more-on-restricted-use-cases
UK Central Digital and Data Office (2020) Data ethics framework. In: Gov.uk. https://web.archive.org/web/20230310054327/https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/data-ethics-framework
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (1991) Federal policy for the protection of human subjects (“Common rule”). HHS.gov
Varol O, Ferrara E, Davis CA, Menczer F, Flammini A (2017) Online human-bot interactions: detection, estimation, and characterization. In: Proceedings of the eleventh international AAAI conference on web and social media (ICWSM 2017). AAAI Publications, Montreal, Canada, p 10
Verma IM (2014) Editorial expression of concern: experimental evidence of massivescale emotional contagion through social networks. Proc Natl Acad Sci 111:10779–10779. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1412469111
Vestoso M (2018) The GDPR beyond privacy: data-driven challenges for social scientists, legislators and policy-makers. Future Internet 10:62. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi10070062
Villarroel Ordenes F, Grewal D, Ludwig S, Ruyter KD, Mahr D, Wetzels M (2019) Cutting through content clutter: how speech and image acts drive consumer sharing of social media brand messages. J Consumer Res 45:988–1012. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcr/ucy032
Vlassenroot E, Chambers S, Di Pretoro E, Geeraert F, Haesendonck G, Michel A, Mechant P (2019) Web archives as a data resource for digital scholars. Int J Digital Human 1:85–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42803-019-00007-7
Voigt P, von dem Bussche A (2017) The EU general data protection regulation (GDPR). Springer International Publishing, Cham, Switzerland
Washington Post (2018) Transcript of Mark Zuckerberg’s Senate hearing
Weller K, Kinder-Kurlanda KE (2016) A manifesto for data sharing in social media research. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on web science—WebSci ’16. ACM Press, Hannover, Germany, pp 166–172
Wilkinson D, Thelwall M (2011) Researching personal information on the public web: methods and ethics. Soc Sci Comput Rev 29:387–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439310378979
Wilkof N (2016) IP knowledge in the age of Wikipedia and the blogosphere. J Intellect Property Law Pract 11:477–478. https://doi.org/10.1093/jiplp/jpw072
Williams SA, Terras MM, Warwick C (2013) What do people study when they study Twitter? Classifying Twitter related academic papers. J Documen 69:384–410. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2012-0027
Wilson RE, Gosling SD, Graham LT (2012) A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspect Psychol Sci 7:203–220. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612442904
Wittwer M, Reinhold O, Alt R (2017) Capturing customer context from social media: mapping social media API and CRM profile data. In: Proceedings of the international conference on web intelligence. Association for computing machinery, leipzig, Germany, pp 993–997
Zhang Z, He Q, Gao J, Ni M (2018) A deep learning approach for detecting traffic accidents from social media data. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Technol 86:580–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.11.027
Zimmer M (2018) Addressing conceptual gaps in big data research ethics: an application of contextual integrity. Social Media + Society 4. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118768300
Zimmer M (2016) OkCupid study reveals the perils of big-data science. Wired
Zimmer M (2015) The twitter archive at the library of congress: challenges for information practice and information policy. First Monday.https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v20i7.5619
Zimmer M (2010) “But the data is already public”: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics Inf Technol 12:313–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9227-5
Zimmer M, Proferes NJ (2014) A topology of Twitter research: Disciplines, methods, and ethics. Aslib J Inf Manag 66:250–261. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0083
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mannheimer, S. (2024). Big Social Research in Practice. In: Scaling Up: How Data Curation Can Help Address Key Issues in Qualitative Data Reuse and Big Social Research. Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49222-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49222-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-49221-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-49222-8
eBook Packages: Synthesis Collection of Technology (R0)