ScamCoins, S*** posters, and the search for the next Bitcoin™: Collective sensemaking in cryptocurrency discussions

被引：7
作者：
Jahani E. [1 ]
Krafft P.M. [2 ]
Suhara Y. [3 ]
Moro E. [3 ,4 ]
Pentland A.S. [3 ]
机构：
[1] MIT IDSS, 50 Ames St, Cambridge, 02142, MA
[2] MIT CSAIL, 77 Massachusetts Avenue, Cambridge, 02139, MA
[3] MIT Media Lab, 20 Ames St, Cambridge, 02142, MA
[4] GISC, Department of Mathematics, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
来源：
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction | 2018年 / 2卷 / CSCW期
基金：
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词：
Collective intelligence; Computational social science; Cryptocurrency; Information processing; Online discussion;
D O I：
10.1145/3274348
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Participants in cryptocurrency markets are in constant communication with each other about the latest coins and news releases. Do these conversations build hype through the contagiousness of excitement, help the community process information, or play some other role? Using a novel dataset from a major cryptocurrency forum, we conduct an exploratory study of the characteristics of online discussion around cryptocurrencies. Through a regression analysis, we ind that coins with more information available and higher levels of technical innovation are associated with higher quality discussion. People who talk about łseriousž coins tend to participate in discussion displaying signatures of collective intelligence and information processing, while people who talk about łless seriousž coins tend to display signatures of hype and naïvety. Interviews with experienced forum members also conirm these quantitative indings. These results highlight the varied roles of discussion in the cryptocurrency ecosystem and suggest that discussion of serious coins may be oriented towards earnest, perhaps more accurate, attempts at discovering which coins are likely to succeed. © 2018 Association for Computing Machinery.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 60 条
[1]  
Andersen J.V., Bogusz C.I., Patterns of self-organising in the bitcoin online community: Code forking as organising in digital infrastructure, ICIS, (2017)
[2]  
Anthony D., Smith S.W., Williamson T., Explaining Quality in Internet Collective Goods: Zealots and Good Samaritans in The Case of Wikipedia, (2005)
[3]  
Bekaert G., Engstrom E., Xing Y., Risk, uncertainty, and asset prices, Journal of Financial Economics, 91, 1, (2009)
[4]  
Bollen J., Mao H., Zeng X., Twitter mood predicts the stock market, Journal of Computational Science, 2, 1, (2011)
[5]  
Bonabeau E., Meyer C., Swarm intelligence: A whole new way to think about business, Harvard Business Review, 79, 5, (2001)
[6]  
Bouoiyour J., Selmi R., What does bitcoin look like?, Annals of Economics & Finance, 16, (2015)
[7]  
Cheah E.-T., Fry J., Speculative bubbles in bitcoin markets? an empirical investigation into the fundamental value of bitcoin, Economics Letters, 130, (2015)
[8]  
Chen H., De P., Hu Y.J., Hwang B.-H., Wisdom of crowds: The value of stock opinions transmitted through social media, The Review of Financial Studies, 27, 5, (2014)
[9]  
Chiu J., Koeppl T.V., The Economics of Cryptocurrenciesśbitcoin and Beyond, (2017)
[10]  
Coinmarketcap.Com
123456