Originator or propagator? Incorporating social role theory into topic models for twitter content analysis

A large number of studies have been devoted to modeling the contents and interactions between users on Twitter. In this paper, we propose a method inspired from Social Role Theory (SRT), which assumes that a user behaves differently in different roles in the generation process of Twitter content. We consider the two most distinctive social roles on Twitter: originator and propagator, who respectively posts original messages and retweets or forwards the messages from others. In addition, we also consider role-specific social interactions, especially implicit interactions between users who share some common interests. All the above elements are integrated into a novel regularized topic model. We evaluate the proposed method on real Twitter data. The results show that our method is more effective than the existing ones which do not distinguish social roles. Copyright 2013 ACM.

Discourses of friendship between heterosexual women and gay men:mythical norms and an absence of desire

Gay men and heterosexual women may share some common interests in critiquing hetero-patriarchy. However feminism and gay liberationist politics do not always coincide and the role of individual subjectivities in recognising oppressive discourses of normativity remains debated. Interviews were conducted with seven friendship dyads of heterosexual women and gay men. Transcripts were subjected to discourse analysis, which suggested extensive management of heterosexist norms in the friends' accounts of friendship. The analysis highlighted ambiguity over the 'male' status of gay men, a concern with constructing the friendships as legitimately asexual, and the use of parody in the face of homophobia to disrupt normative assumptions. Although we primarily considered the role of heterosexist discourses, there is also evidence that other dimensions of non-normativity (for example, gender and ethnicity) are implicated in friendships constructed around shared otherness and mutual non-normativity. © 2010 SAGE.

Strategic ambiguity as a rhetorical resource for enabling multiple interests

The literature on ambiguity reflects contradictory views on its value as a resource or a problem for organizational action. In this longitudinal empirical study of ambiguity about a strategic goal, we examined how strategic ambiguity is used as a discursive resource by different organizational constituents and how that is associated with collective action around the strategic goal. We found four rhetorical positions, each of which drew upon strategic ambiguity to construct the strategic goal differently according to whether the various constituents were asserting their own interests or accommodating wider organizational interests. However, we also found that the different constituents maintained these four rhetorical positions simultaneously over time, enabling them to shift between their own and other’s interests rather than converging upon a common interest. These findings are used to develop a conceptual framework that explains how strategic ambiguity might serve as a resource for different organizational constituents to assert their own interests whilst also enabling collective organizational action, at least of a temporary nature.