Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.

In the Twitter blogosphere, the number of followers is probably the most basic and succinct quantity for measuring popularity of users. However, the number of followers can be manipulated in various ways; we can even buy follows. Therefore, alternative popularity measures for Twitter users on the ba...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kodai Saito, Naoki Masuda
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24416209/pdf/?tool=EBI
id doaj-bf2602935c504dbba26ed37b2f83b443
record_format Article
spelling doaj-bf2602935c504dbba26ed37b2f83b4432021-03-04T10:04:05ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0191e8426510.1371/journal.pone.0084265Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.Kodai SaitoNaoki MasudaIn the Twitter blogosphere, the number of followers is probably the most basic and succinct quantity for measuring popularity of users. However, the number of followers can be manipulated in various ways; we can even buy follows. Therefore, alternative popularity measures for Twitter users on the basis of, for example, users' tweets and retweets, have been developed. In the present work, we take a purely network approach to this fundamental question. First, we find that two relatively distinct types of users possessing a large number of followers exist, in particular for Japanese, Russian, and Korean users among the seven language groups that we examined. A first type of user follows a small number of other users. A second type of user follows approximately the same number of other users as the number of follows that the user receives. Then, we compare local (i.e., egocentric) followership networks around the two types of users with many followers. We show that the second type, which is presumably uninfluential users despite its large number of followers, is characterized by high link reciprocity, a large number of friends (i.e., those whom a user follows) for the followers, followers' high link reciprocity, large clustering coefficient, large fraction of the second type of users among the followers, and a small PageRank. Our network-based results support that the number of followers used alone is a misleading measure of user's popularity. We propose that the number of friends, which is simple to measure, also helps us to assess the popularity of Twitter users.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24416209/pdf/?tool=EBI
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Kodai Saito
Naoki Masuda
spellingShingle Kodai Saito
Naoki Masuda
Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Kodai Saito
Naoki Masuda
author_sort Kodai Saito
title Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
title_short Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
title_full Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
title_fullStr Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
title_full_unstemmed Two types of well followed users in the followership networks of Twitter.
title_sort two types of well followed users in the followership networks of twitter.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description In the Twitter blogosphere, the number of followers is probably the most basic and succinct quantity for measuring popularity of users. However, the number of followers can be manipulated in various ways; we can even buy follows. Therefore, alternative popularity measures for Twitter users on the basis of, for example, users' tweets and retweets, have been developed. In the present work, we take a purely network approach to this fundamental question. First, we find that two relatively distinct types of users possessing a large number of followers exist, in particular for Japanese, Russian, and Korean users among the seven language groups that we examined. A first type of user follows a small number of other users. A second type of user follows approximately the same number of other users as the number of follows that the user receives. Then, we compare local (i.e., egocentric) followership networks around the two types of users with many followers. We show that the second type, which is presumably uninfluential users despite its large number of followers, is characterized by high link reciprocity, a large number of friends (i.e., those whom a user follows) for the followers, followers' high link reciprocity, large clustering coefficient, large fraction of the second type of users among the followers, and a small PageRank. Our network-based results support that the number of followers used alone is a misleading measure of user's popularity. We propose that the number of friends, which is simple to measure, also helps us to assess the popularity of Twitter users.
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24416209/pdf/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT kodaisaito twotypesofwellfollowedusersinthefollowershipnetworksoftwitter
AT naokimasuda twotypesofwellfollowedusersinthefollowershipnetworksoftwitter
_version_ 1714806738407915520