oa The 4CAT Capture and Analysis Toolkit: A Modular Tool for Transparent and Traceable Social Media Research

References

1. Al-Rawi, A. (2020). The convergence of social media and other communication technologies in the promotion of illicit and controlled drugs. Journal of Public Health, fdaa210. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdaa210
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bastian, M., Heymann, S., & Jacomy, M. (2009). Gephi: An Open Source Software for Exploring and Manipulating Networks. Third International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 361–362.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Baumgartner, J., Zannettou, S., Keegan, B., Squire, M., & Blackburn, J. (2020). The Pushshift Reddit Dataset. ArXiv:2001.08435 [Cs]. http://arxiv.org/abs/2001.08435
   [Google Scholar]
4. Baym, N. K. (2000). Tune in, log on: Soaps, fandom, and online community. Sage Publications.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Berry, D. (2011). The computational turn: Thinking about the digital humanities. Culture Machine, 12.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Borra, E., & Rieder, B. (2014). Programmed method: Developing a toolset for capturing and analyzing tweets. Aslib Journal of Information Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-09-2013-0094
   [Google Scholar]
7. Bowker, G. (2013). Data flakes: An afterword to “Raw Data” is an oxymoron. In L.Gitelman (Ed.), “Raw Data” is an Oxymoron (pp. 167–171). MIT Press.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2011). Six Provocations for Big Data. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1926431
   [Google Scholar]
9. Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2017). The Affordances of Social Media Platforms. Sage Publications. https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier=149a9089-49a4-454c-b935-a6ea7f2d8986
   [Google Scholar]
10. Crawford, K. (2013, April1). The Hidden Biases in Big Data. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2013/04/the-hidden-biases-in-big-data
    [Google Scholar]
11. de Zeeuw, D., Hagen, S., Peeters, S., & Jokubauskaite, E. (2020). Tracing normiefication: A cross-platform analysis of the QAnon conspiracy theory. First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v25i11.10643
    [Google Scholar]
12. Donovan, J., Lewis, B., & Friedberg, B. (2019). Parallel Ports: Sociotechnical Change from the Alt-Right to Alt-Tech. In M.Fielitz & N.Thurston (Eds.), Post-Digital Cultures of the Far Right: Online Actions and Offline Consequences in Europe and the US (pp. 49–63). transcript Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Gaffney, D., & Matias, J. N. (2018). Caveat emptor, computational social science: Large-scale missing data in a widely-published Reddit corpus. PLOS ONE, 13(7), e0200162. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0200162
    [Google Scholar]
14. Giguet, E., & Lucas, N. (2009). Share and Explore Discussion Forum Objects on the Calico Website. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Practices, 174–176.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, Texts and Affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456. https://doi.org/10.1177/S0038038501000219
    [Google Scholar]
16. Jokubauskaitė, E., & Peeters, S. (2020). Generally Curious: Thematically Distinct Datasets of General Threads on 4chan/pol/. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 14, 863–867.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Kirschenbaum, M. (2012). What Is Digital Humanities and What’s It Doing in English Departments? In M. K.Gold (Ed.), Debates in the Digital Humanities (pp. 3–11). University of Minnesota Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1999). Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Koolen, M., van Gorp, J., & van Ossenbruggen, J. (2019). Toward a model for digital tool criticism: Reflection as integrative practice. Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 34(2), 368–385. https://doi.org/10.1093/llc/fqy048
    [Google Scholar]
20. Latour, B. (2011). Networks, Societies, Spheres: Reflections of an Actor-network Theorist. International Journal of Communication, 5(0), 15.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Latour, B., Jensen, P., Venturini, T., Grauwin, S., & Boullier, D. (2012). ‘The Whole Is Always Smaller Than Its Parts’ – A Digital Test of Gabriel Tardes’ Monads. The British Journal of Sociology, 63(4), 590–615. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-4446.2012.01428.x
    [Google Scholar]
22. Manovich, L. (2001). The Language of New Media. MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Niemelä, M., Kaasinen, E., & Ikonen, V. (2014). Ethics by design—An experience-based proposal for introducing ethics to R&D of emerging ICTs. ETHICOMP 2014 – Liberty and Security in an Age of ICTs. https://cris.vtt.fi/en/publications/ethics-by-design-an-experience-based-proposal-for-introducing-eth
    [Google Scholar]
24. Rieder, B., & Röhle, T. (2012). Digital Methods: Five Challenges. In D. M.Berry (Ed.), Understanding Digital Humanities (pp. 67–84). Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230371934_4
    [Google Scholar]
25. Rieder, B., & Röhle, T. (2017). Digital Methods: From Challenges to Bildung. In M. T.Schäfer & K.Van Es (Eds.), The Datafied Society: Studying Culture through Data (pp. 109–124). Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
26. Sveningsson Elm, M. (2009). How do various notions of privacy influence decisions in qualitative internet research? In A.Markham & N.Baym (Eds.), Internet Inquiry: Conversations About Method (pp. 69–97). SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329086
    [Google Scholar]
27. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness (Rev. and expanded ed). Penguin Books.
    [Google Scholar]
28. Tuters, M., & Hagen, S. (2019). (((They))) rule: Memetic antagonism and nebulous othering on 4chan. New Media & Society, 146144481988874. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819888746
    [Google Scholar]
29. van Es, K., López Coombs, N., & Boeschoten, T. (2017). Towards a Reflexive Digital Data Analysis. In The Datafied Society: Studying Culture through Data (pp. 171–180). Amsterdam University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. van Es, K., Wieringa, M., & Schäfer, M. T. (2018). Tool Criticism: From Digital Methods to Digital Methodology. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Web Studies – WS.2 2018, 24–27. https://doi.org/10.1145/3240431.3240436
    [Google Scholar]
31. Venturini, T. (2011). What is second-degree objectivity and how could it be represented. http://www.medialab.sciences-po.fr/publications/Venturini-Second_Degree_Objectivi-ty_draft1.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
32. Zelenkauskaite, A., Toivanen, P., Huhtamäki, J., & Valaskivi, K. (2020). Shades of hatred online: 4chan duplicate circulation surge during hybrid media events. First Monday. https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v26i1.11075
    [Google Scholar]
33. Zimmer, M. (2010). “But the data is already public”: On the ethics of research in Facebook. Ethics and Information Technology, 12(4), 313–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-010-9227-5
    [Google Scholar]