Exploring social networks of #Election2020results and #BidenTransition on Twitter after the presidential election in the United States

Authors

  • Ahmed Deen School of Media Arts and Studies Ohio University
  • Po-Lin Pan Department of Communication Arkansas State University

Keywords:

social network analysis, Twitter, hashtag, #Election2020results, BidenTransition, presidential election

Abstract

Using Netlytic, Gephi, and Voyant, this study attempted to provide an in-depth social network analysis of two hashtags #Election2020results and #BidenTransition after the 2020 presidential election in the US. The data were collected from November 24th to November 30th, 2020, where the tweets of both hashtags increased dramatically. A total of 39,341 tweets of both hashtags were included in this analysis. Results showed that when the mode was considered as a multimode network, five influential nodes were found, with three from the same organization — MyNation based in India. The term, Biden Transition, was consistently repeated (21,571 out of 39,341 tweets) within the networks. Moreover, most tweets within the networks were retweeted from original tweets, due to that #BidenTransition was 20,039 out of 39,341 tweets for both hashtags. Practical implications of Twitter users’ tendencies among the two selected hashtags #Election2020results and #BidenTransition were also discussed.

References

Ausserhofer, J., & Maireder, A. (2013). National politics on Twitter: Structures and topics of a networked public sphere. Information, Communication & Society, 16(3), 291-314.

Bastian M., Heymann S., Jacomy M. (2009). Gephi: an open source software for exploring and manipulating networks. International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.

Bastos, M. T., Raimundo, R. L. G., & Travitzki, R. (2013). Gatekeeping Twitter: Message diffusion in political hashtags. Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 260-270.

Bennett, W. L., & Iyengar, S. (2008). A new era of minimal effects? The changing foundations of political communication. Journal of Communication, 58(4), 707-731.

Bhagat, S., Cormode, G., Krishnamurthy, B., & Srivastava, D. (2009). Class-based graph anonymization for social network data. Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment, 2(1), 766-777.

Bode, L., Hanna, A., Yang, J., & Shah, D. V. (2015). Candidate Networks, Citizen Clusters, and Political Expression: Strategic Hashtag Use in the 2010 Midterms. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 659(1), 149–165.

Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. E. (2011, August). The use of Twitter hashtags in the formation of ad hoc publics. Proceedings of the 6th European Consortium for Political Research (ECPR).

Cody, E. M., Reagan, A. J., Mitchell, L., Dodds, P. S., & Danforth, C. M. (2015). Climate change sentiment on Twitter: An unsolicited public opinion poll. PloS one, 10(8), e0136092.

Conover, M. D., Ratkiewicz, J., Francisco, M. R., Gonçalves, B., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2011). Political polarization on Twitter. Icwsm, 133(26), 89-96.

Conway, B. A., Kenski, K., & Wang, D. (2015). The rise of Twitter in the political campaign: Searching for intermedia agenda-setting effects in the presidential primary. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(4), 363-380

Emirbayer, M., & Goodwin, J. (1994). Network analysis, culture, and the problem of agency. American Journal of Sociology, 99(6), 1411-1454.

Garlaschelli, D., & Loffredo, M. I. (2004). Patterns of link reciprocity in directed networks. Physical Review Letters, 93(26), 268701.

Gephi. (2020). About Gephi. Retrieved from https://gephi.org/about/.

Golbeck, J. (2013). Analyzing the social web. Waltham, MA: Elsevier Inc.

Grandjean, M. (2016). A social network analysis of Twitter: Mapping the digital humanities community, Cogent Arts & Humanities, 3(1).

Grunspan, D. Z., Wiggins, B. L., & Goodreau, S. M. (2014). Understanding classrooms through social network analysis: A primer for social network analysis in education Research. CBE life sciences education, 13(2), 167–179.

Hanneman, R. A. & Riddle, M. (2005). Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California Press.

Hansen D. L., Shneiderman, B., Smith, M, & Himelboim, I. (2020). Analyzing social media newtorks with NodeXL: Insights from a connected world (2nd edition). Waltham, MA: Elsevier Inc.

Hootsuite (2020). Digital 2020: A comprehensive look at the state of the internet, mobile device, social media and commerce. Retrieved form: Digital Trends & Social Media Statistics 2020 - Hootsuite

Karami, A., Bennett, L. S., & He, X. (2018). Mining public opinion about economic issues: Twitter and the us presidential election. International Journal of Strategic Decision Sciences, 9(1), 18-28.

Khan, G. (2018). Creating value with social media analytics: Managing, aligning, and mining social media text, networks, actions, location, apps, hyperlinks, multimedia, and search engines data. Seattle, MA: CreateSpace.

Kreiss, D., & McGregor, S. C. (2018). Technology firms shape political communication: The work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google with campaigns during the 2016 US presidential cycle. Political Communication, 35(2), 155-177.

Lemire, J., Miller, Z., & Weissert, W. (November 5, 2020). Trump hits election integrity with unsupported complaints. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-donald-trump-counting-election-1686896c09a50f8ea545f98a76a17dec.

Liu, X., Bollen, J., Nelson, M. L., & Van de Sompel, H. (2005). Co-authorship networks in the digital library research community. Information Processing & Management, 41(6), 1462-1480.

Marsden, P. V. (2002). Egocentric and sociocentric measures of network centrality. Social Networks, 24(4), 407-422.

Nason, G. J., O’Kelly, F., Bouchier-Hayes, D., Quinlan, D. M., & Manecksha, R. P. (2015). Twitter expands the reach and engagement of a national scientific meeting: the Irish society of urology. Irish Journal of Medical Science (1971-), 184(3), 685-689.

Netlytic.org. (2020). About Netlytic. Retrieved from https://netlytic.org/home/?page_id=10834.

Newman, M. E. (2006). Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103(23), 8577-8582.

Omena, J. J., Rabello, E. T., & Mintz, A. G. (2020). Digital methods for hashtag engagement research. Social Media+ Society, 6(3): 1.

Smith, M.A., Rainie, L., Himelboim, I., Shneiderman, B. (2014, February 20). Mapping Twitter topic networks, Pew Research Center. Retrieved from polarized crowds to community clusters URL: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2014/02/20/.

Stieglitz, S., & Dang-Xuan, L. (2013). Social media and political communication: a social media analytics framework. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 3(4), 1277-1291.

Tang, L., Liu, H., & Zhang, J. (2011). Identifying evolving groups in dynamic multimode networks. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 24(1), 72-85.

Tumasjan, A., Sprenger, T. O., Sandner, P. G., & Welpe, I. M. (2010, May). Predicting elections with Twitter: What 140 characters reveal about political sentiment. Fourth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media.

Twitter. (2020). About Twitter. Retrieved from https://about.twitter.com/en_us.html.

Wasserman, S., & Faust, K. (1994). Social network analysis: Methods and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

We Are Social Inc. (2020). Digital 2020 US. Retrieved from https://wearesocial.com/us/digital-2020-us.

Downloads

Published

2022-12-30

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 2 (2022): The Journal of Social Media in Society

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).