Related to Dave Weinberger's point in Miscellaneous that there's a difference between explicitly created profiles and implicit data (such as a tag cloud for del.icio.us)
This link has been bookmarked by 34 people . It was first bookmarked on 24 Feb 2009, by someone privately.
-
19 Feb 10
-
02 Jun 09
-
08 May 09
-
31 Mar 09
lilian ricaudScholars, advertisers and political activists see massive online social networks as a representation of social interactions that can be used to study the propagation of ideas, social bond dynamics and viral marketing, among others. But the linked structur
twitter social-networking social-networks social-media webecosystems en
-
28 Mar 09
Luis AlberolaInteresting post that analyzes relationships on social networks
-
But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people
-
But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people
-
But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people
-
In day-to-day online conversations, content exchange and reciprocity are the currencies that finance the Social Economy
-
The individual social graph is then networked by the common interests of people as they relate to specific dialogue over time and also in the moment, and thus, it's always expanding and contracting
-
It is for this reason, that we should also create and analyze contextual maps based on the themes that bring us together.
-
-
09 Mar 09
Hans Henrik H HemingGod artikel om hvordan skjulte netvæk faktisk er vigtigere end det som umiddelbart lader sig vise
-
08 Mar 09
-
07 Mar 09
-
But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people. Scarcity of attention and the daily rhythms of life and work makes people default to interacting with those few that matter and that reciprocate their attention.
-
inherently ambient and not intimate
-
In life, we embrace those relationships that are mutually beneficial and not necessarily one-sided.
-
Add Sticky NoteA link between any two people does not necessarily imply an interaction between them.
-
-
top-down network
-
shared behavior in the practice of RT (retweeting) on Twitter or "liking" on Facebook or Friendfeed
-
the Influence Factor (IF). It is a related network that connects second, third-level and sequential friends and friends of friends (FOFs) that are bound by topic and time
-
the most accurate Relevant Net that truly documents actual relationships is The Backchannel - those individuals whom someone directly engages behind the scenes
-
-
02 Mar 09
Tania Shekoblog post on visualising relationships on twitter and other social networks
-
Howard RheingoldExcellent analysis of how conversations around pieces of content constitute a new kind of hidden social network that ride on our social graph, based on Huberman et al "Social networks that matter: Twitter under the microscope."
-
Scholars, advertisers and political activists see massive online social networks as a representation of social interactions that can be used to study the propagation of ideas, social bond dynamics and viral marketing, among others. But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people. Scarcity of attention and the daily rhythms of life and work makes people default to interacting with those few that matter and that reciprocate their attention. A study of social interactions within Twitter reveals that the driver of usage is a sparse and hidden network of connections underlying the “declared” set of friends and followers.
-
According to the report, "A link between any two people does not necessarily imply an interaction between them. As we showed in the case of Twitter, most of the links declared within Twitter were meaningless from an interaction point of view. Thus the need to find the hidden social network; the one that matters when trying to rely on word of mouth to spread an idea,
a belief, or a trend." -
Social Networks have created a parallel friend/follower archetype that injects a homologous top-down network where individuals not only connect with those they know, but also with those who are interested in following their online activity, and not necessarily with the expectation of reciprocation. This injects a new dynamic into online social relationships, one that facilitates and fosters a less personal, but still meaningful engagement, creating an ambient, persona-audience interconnection.
-
This is what's called the "Hidden Network," but it's not representative of the whole story. This map merely represents a moment in time where context and related events connected individuals and therefore formed a transient first-level map of contextual relations or conversations.
-
Whether or not these conversations are intended to elicit a response directly from a source or @username, the orbiting dialog around a particular person and the topic of conversation is paramount. We're seeing this increasing level of shared behavior in the practice of RT (retweeting) on Twitter or "liking" on Facebook or Friendfeed. The public sharing of relevant content introduced by any given individual sparks conversations across social graphs with or without the formal participation of the original contributor. This exchange changes based on the content that's introduced to the public.
This is what I call the Influence Factor (IF). It is a related network that connects second, third-level and sequential friends and friends of friends (FOFs) that are bound by topic and time. -
In day-to-day online conversations, content exchange and reciprocity are the currencies that finance the Social Economy. This entire discussion is true and constant whether focused on Twitter or traditional social networks such as Facebook or MySpace.
A social network is not necessarily bound by relationships as much as it is driven by the exchange of shared ideas and information through a one-to-one and one-to-many conversation that is inclusive of top-down, bottom-up, inside-out, and outside-in peer-to-peer interaction.
Many of us forge relationships and engage in online conversations unlike those we maintain in the real world. -
The ties that bind us together in online networks aren't intrinsically dictated by people, but instead by constant as well as shifting contextual themes that unite us. It forms the foundation for a different dynamic for engagement and a new definition of relationship
-
It is for this reason, that we should also create and analyze contextual maps based on the themes that bring us together.
Therefore keywords, not necessarily those conversations we host or "@" in aggregate, are the primary research criterion when analyzing the connection and interaction between individuals and groups to more accurately identify and chart a "contextual map" that visualizes the distinct relationships united by commonality, affinity, and/or loyalty.
-
-
01 Mar 09
-
26 Feb 09
August JacksonBernardo A. Huberman, Daniel M. Romero and Fang Wu of the Social Computing Laboratory at HP Labs conducted an in-depth study of the relationships that power Twitter. The team recently released its report, "Social networks that matter: Twitter under the mi
socialmedia twitter socialnetworking research analysis visualization
-
25 Feb 09
Mael Le HirScholars, advertisers and political activists see massive online social networks as a representation of social interactions that can be used to study the propagation of ideas, social bond dynamics and viral marketing, among others. But the linked structures of social networks do not reveal actual interactions among people. Scarcity of attention and the daily rhythms of life and work makes people default to interacting with those few that matter and that reciprocate their attention. A study of social interactions within Twitter reveals that the driver of usage is a sparse and hidden network of connections underlying the “declared” set of friends and followers.
-
Steven FarrellThis is an excellent article. I have not read the full report via PDF but it can be linked to from here.
-
Web and why they are inherently ambient and not intimate as opposed to those we maintain in the real world. In life, we embrace those relationships that are mutually beneficial and not necessarily one-sided.
-
The new social economy also aspired the building of bridges between the previously disconnected and interspersed relationships that join friends of a friend (FOAF).
-
Social Networks have created a parallel friend/follower archetype that injects a homologous top-down network where individuals not only connect with those they know, but also with those who are interested in following their online activity, and not necessarily with the expectation of reciprocation
-
He observes, "The number of people you follow on Twitter is not the whole truth. It’s more interesting [to see] who you are talking to whether you are following them or not. It [is] not a connection-based network but a performance-based network."
-
The followers and followers of followers that consistently, and loyally, RT, @, promote, or cite (tweet) excerpts of content related to a particular username is a far more compelling revelation into the true influence and authority of a relevant network
-
RT (retweeting) on Twitter or "liking" on Facebook or Friendfeed. The public sharing of relevant content introduced by any given individual sparks conversations across social graphs with or without the formal participation of the original contributor
-
This is what I call the Influence Factor (IF). It is a related network that connects second, third-level and sequential friends and friends of friends (FOFs) that are bound by topic and time.
-
This additional, but no less relevant, hidden phenomena is the explicit exchange of content, a private request, or an implicit action that catalyzes the sharing of information, content, or ideas across multiple, distinct social graphs to directly influence and catalyze the friends of those trusted social beacons as well as the progression levels of the friends of friends effect.
-
In day-to-day online conversations, content exchange and reciprocity are the currencies that finance the Social Economy
-
A social network is not necessarily bound by relationships as much as it is driven by the exchange of shared ideas and information through a one-to-one and one-to-many conversation
-
The ties that bind us together in online networks aren't intrinsically dictated by people, but instead by constant as well as shifting contextual themes that unite us
-
It is for this reason, that we should also create and analyze contextual maps based on the themes that bring us together.
-
analyzing the connection and interaction between individuals and groups to more accurately identify and chart a "contextual map" that visualizes the distinct relationships united by commonality, affinity, and/or loyalty.
-
-
24 Feb 09
-
23 Feb 09
Joseph ThornleyBernardo A. Huberman, Daniel M. Romero and Fang Wu of the Social Computing Laboratory at HP Labs conducted an in-depth study of the relationships that power Twitter. The team recently released its report, "Social networks that matter: Twitter under the mi
-
-
Avi .The Ties that Binds Us - Visualizing Relationships on Twitter and Social Networks http://bit.ly/Z59DH
-
Anatol VettersArtikel über die Netzwerke, die hinter Twitter liegen.
Public Stiky Notes
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.