Causal effects of brevity on style and success in social media

被引:9
作者
Gligoric K. [1 ]
Anderson A. [2 ]
West R. [1 ]
机构
[1] EPFL, Switzerland
[2] University of Toronto, Canada
基金
加拿大自然科学与工程研究理事会;
关键词
Brevity; Causal effects; Conciseness; Crowdsourcing; Experimental methods; Linguistic style; Microblogging; Social media; Twitter;
D O I
10.1145/3359147
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In online communities, where billions of people strive to propagate their messages, understanding how wording affects success is of primary importance. In this work, we are interested in one particularly salient aspect of wording: brevity. What is the causal effect of brevity on message success? What are the linguistic traits of brevity? When is brevity beneficial, and when is it not? Whereas most prior work has studied the effect of wording on style and success in observational setups, we conduct a controlled experiment, in which crowd workers shorten social media posts to prescribed target lengths and other crowd workers subsequently rate the original and shortened versions. This allows us to isolate the causal effect of brevity on the success of a message. We find that concise messages are on average more successful than the original messages up to a length reduction of 30–40%. The optimal reduction is on average between 10% and 20%. The observed effect is robust across different subpopulations of raters and is the strongest for raters who visit social media on a daily basis. Finally, we discover unique linguistic and content traits of brevity and correlate them with the measured probability of success in order to distinguish effective from ineffective shortening strategies. Overall, our findings are important for developing a better understanding of the effect of brevity on the success of messages in online social media. © 2019 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 59 条
  • [1] CSCW 2018 Call for Papers, (2018)
  • [2] Artzi Y., Pantel P., Gamon M., Predicting responses to microblog posts, Proc. Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, (2012)
  • [3] Backstrom L., Bakshy E., Kleinberg J.M., Lento T.M., Rosenn I., Center of attention: How Facebook users allocate attention across friends, Proc. International Conference on Web and Social Media, (2011)
  • [4] Bakshy E., Hofman J.M., Mason W.A., Watts D.J., Everyone’s an influencer: Quantifying influence on Twitter, Proc. ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, (2011)
  • [5] Baumeister R.F., Bratslavsky E., Finkenauer C., Vohs K.D., Bad is stronger than good, Review of General Psychology, 5, 4, (2001)
  • [6] Bawden D., Robinson L., The dark side of information: Overload, anxiety and other paradoxes and pathologies, Journal of Information Science, 35, 2, pp. 180-191, (2009)
  • [7] Berger J., Milkman K.L., What makes online content viral?, Journal of Marketing Research, 49, 2, pp. 192-205, (2012)
  • [8] Bernstein M.S., Little G., Miller R.C., Hartmann B., Ackerman M.S., Karger D.R., Crowell D., Panovich K., Soylent: A word processor with a crowd inside, Commun. ACM, 58, 8, pp. 85-94, (2015)
  • [9] Bramoulle Y., Ductor L., Title length, Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 150, pp. 311-324, (2018)
  • [10] Burrows S., Potthast M., Stein B., Paraphrase acquisition via crowdsourcing and machine learning, ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 4, 3, (2013)