On the causal relation between real world activities and emotional expressions of social media users
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Social interactions through online social media have become a daily routine of many, and the number of those whose real world (offline) and online lives have become intertwined is continuously growing. As such, the interplay of individuals' online and offline activities has been the subject of numerous research studies, the majority of which explored the impact of people's online actions on their offline activities. The opposite direction of impact—the effect of real‐world activities on online actions—has also received attention but to a lesser degree. To contribute to the latter form of impact, this paper reports on a quasi‐experimental design study that examined the presence of causal relations between real‐world activities of online social media users and their online emotional expressions. To this end, we have collected a large dataset (over 17K users) from Twitter and Foursquare, and systematically aligned user content on the two social media platforms. Users' Foursquare check‐ins provided information about their offline activities, whereas the users' expressions of emotions and moods were derived from their Twitter posts. Since our study was based on a quasi‐experimental design, to minimize the impact of covariates, we applied an innovative model of computing propensity scores. Our main findings can be summarized as follows: (a) users' offline activities do impact their affective expressions, both of emotions and moods, as evidenced in their online shared textual content; (b) the impact depends on the type of offline activity and if the user embarks on or abandons the activity. Our findings can be used to devise a personalized recommendation mechanism to help people better manage their online emotional expressions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".