Content uploaded by Martin Ebner
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Martin Ebner
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Martin Ebner
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Martin Ebner
Content may be subject to copyright.
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
How People are using Twitter during Conferences
Wolfgang Reinhardt
✢
, Martin Ebner
Γ
, Günter Beham
✧
, Cristina Costa
◆
✢
University of Paderborn, Germany,
Γ
Graz University of Technology, Austria,
✧
Graz
University of Technology and Know-Center, Austria,
◆
University of Salford, UK
Abstract: The popularity of microblogging, with special emphasis on twitter, the most famous
application of the kind, is growing rapidly. This kind of tools for micro-exchange of
information and communication is changing the daily life of knowledgeable worker as well as
Internet savvy people. From this perspective this paper aims to show how Twitter can be used
during conferences, and furthermore how different people are using it. With the help of a
survey and analysis of the collected data, benefits regarding the use of a microblogging tool
such as Twitter can be presented. The publication shows evidence on how Twitter can enhance
the knowledge of a given group or community by micro-connecting a diverse online audience.
Statistical data was also used to support this research.
1 Introduction
In the last few years, enormous changes concerning the use of the Web have occurred.
Tim O’Reilly (O’Reilly, 2005) postulated in 2004 for the first time the term Web 2.0
and described not a new technology, but users’ new attitude. Nowadays anybody can
participate on the WorldWideWeb by using wikis, weblogs or podcasts. Without any
knowledge of HTML or Web programming any text or media file can be published to
a wider audience. Hence, communication and collaboration becomes easier as proven
by Wikipedia, for example.
By taking a closer look at weblogs it must be acknowledged that this way of
publishing has become a mainstream within a very short time frame. Following the
definition of Schmidt (Schmidt et al, 2005) and Walker (Walker, 2003) a weblog is a
frequently updated website consisting of data entries arranged in reverse
chronological order. But “why is every 30 seconds a new weblog born” as stated by
the biggest weblog search engine Technorati
1
? As shown in different research
publications, accessibility and availability to the Internet and to different devices have
changed dramatically as well as the usability of web applications (Ebner et al, 2009).
The most interesting point about the use of weblogs however is probably related with
the fact that these applications are offering the possibility for communication with a
huge amount of people. The user-centered, decentralized concept (Kolbitsch, 2007),
the per-user publication form (Karger, 2005) allows anyone to become an active
participant on the Internet (Farmer & Bartlett-Bragg, 2005). These are some of the
many examples which show the power of weblogs with impressive research results.
In recent years a new form of blogging designated microblogging has become
increasingly popular. In this paper we describe the term microblog and related
practice, and attempt to discuss how microblogging can be used in conferences. A
survey has been developed to identify relevant key factors related with the
microblogging activity in face to face conferences.
1
http://technorati.com (last visited March 2009)
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
2 What is microblogging?
Microblogging is the latest variant of blogging where messages are posted instantly,
and are usually no longer than 140 characters. Templeton (2008) defines
microblogging as "a small-scale form of blogging, generally made up of short,
succinct messages, used by both consumers and businesses to share news, post status
updates and carry on conversations". These micro-messages can be restricted to a
certain number of individuals, sent exclusively to a specific contact, or made available
to the WorldWideWeb. Microblogging has impressively become more and more
popular in the last two years, and Twitter is probably the most well-known
microblogging platform currently available on the web, when compared with other
microblogging tools, such as Plurk
2
, and Jaiku
3
or the Open Source Tool Identica
4
(Java et al., 2007).
While regular weblogs are mainly used for writing short essays, knowledge saving
and discourse, microblogging is proving extremely useful for the fast exchanges of
thoughts, ideas and information sharing (Ebner & Schiefner, 2008). Thus, when
compared with weblogs, microblogs provide a much more flexible platform for
communication. Furthermore, it must be seen as a new form of communication, where
ideas, simple notifications, hyperlinks are shared just in time (McFedries, 2007). Java
(Java et al., 2007) stated that the main user-intentions for using microblogs can be
categorized by following the types:
• Daily Chatter - using microblogging to answer its original question and
purpose: "what are you doing?” The answer generates reports regarding
routines and other episodes of daily life.
• Conversations - threading conversations between fellow microbloggers,
allowed by the addition of @ to one’s micropost
• Sharing information - Sharing URLs to relevant resources enhanced by short
comments. It can be seen as a user-driven or user-rated exchange of
Hyperlinks.
• Reporting News – providing information on recent events.
Java also reported that most of the users can be characterized as "friends". This means
they are using microblogging platforms as social network sites for networking and
creating learning relationships as well as discussing with friends and followers. The
minority of participants can be distinguished between information seeker (only
reading and lurking, without accounts of any active participation) and information
source (only bringing information in, without reading). McFedries (McFedries, 2007)
described the goal of microblogging as a tool and an approach that means "to enhance
one's cyberspace presence". This points out to important aspects, especially in respect
to Twitter, regarding:
• Mobility
• Third party applications
The "enhancement of our cyberspace" is a main key feature in microblogging,
especially when considering the growing importance of mobility and mobile
2
http://plurk.com
3
http://www.jaiku.com/
4
http://identi.ca/
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
applications. Grisworld (Grisworld, 2007) coined Twitter as today's prime example of
Mobile 2.0 and expressed the importance of microblogging as well as any other
communication platforms to be accessible anywhere and anytime through mobile
devices. Furthermore, the exchange of information should also be made available by
different types of media (for example, pictures, audio, etc). This is, in fact, now
possible through the use of third-party applications such as twitpic
5
.
Another interesting aspect of microblogging is the possibility of hashtagging one's
micro-posts, or tweets, as these are called by Twitter users. The use of hashtags is
extremely useful when sharing and contributing to a specific topic or event. Hashtags
are a simple way of grouping messages with a "#" sign followed by a name or a
special code which will form a unique tag for a specific purpose. Such hashtags are
especially meaningful when used during a particular period of time, as it not only
allows individuals to generate a resource based on that specific thematic, while using
the hashtag, but also bridge knowledge, and knowing, across networks of interest.
3 Motivation
In the last year we have witnessed the use of such approaches as a powerful
component of one's networking activity, and more importantly, it seems to have
become a relevant part of one's informal learning. People in diverse areas such as
Careers services, Librarians, Computer Sciences, students, educators and researchers,
in general, are starting to use the microblogging approach to enrich their knowledge
and simultaneously widen the scope of their personal networks. As Stevens et al.
(Stevens et al., 2007) state, "the value of Twitter is the network" and, consequently, in
the learning and connections one can make while contributing to a spontaneous pool
of ideas, pointing to numerous links and resources.
Nowadays, most formal presentations as well as lectures still occur in a traditional
setting. The presenter or lecturer talks at an auditorium, which is supposed to be
listening to. Especially in large rooms interaction during these face-to-face teaching
sessions rarely happen due to the impersonal and massive environment. There are
numerous publications, which address these mass-education aspects, and a long
tradition of learner-lecturer interaction in huge classes (Bligh, 1971) (Gleason, 1986).
Anderson (Anderson et al., 2003) addressed three crucial factors concerning teaching
and lecturing in big lecture rooms:
• Feedback Lag: There is lack of peer feedback in and by the audience
• Student Apprehension: This factor stresses the fear of individuals in asking
questions
• Single Speaker Paradigm: Only-one-speaker syndrome leads to participation
decrease
Bearing in mind these factors, our research also deals with the question: Can Twitter
(or any other microblogging tool) help to improve interactions among learners, and
enhance their learning experiences? Ebner (Ebner, 2009) shows how microblogging
can be used during a presentation to improve the situation through instant discussions
by the individuals in a class auditorium.
This article is a follow up of previous research in this field. In our first work we de-
scribed how Twitter became the main information backchannel at PPE Summer
5
http://twitpic.com
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
School 2008 rather accidentally (Costa et al., 2008). Tweeting while using a hashtag
to specify the kind of event we were tweeting for and about commenced in a rather
viral way, as opposite to any suggestion made by the organization team. After this
first experience of large-scale use of microblogging in a conference-like community
event many questions have arisen. Hence, we took the decision to deepen our research
in this domain. It was our purpose to analyze and understand the motives as well as
the added value of tweeting in conferences in different contexts, and also by different
people. It is our purpose to explore the contents of what is tweeted during such events,
as also see how one's networks develop from this personal way of communicating and
sharing in a networked environment. Twitter can be used at different stages of a
conference (cf. (Balcom Group, 2007)). There are significantly differences in how
attendees and organizers can use the tool:
Before a conference: Before a conference Twitter is most often used to announce
events, workshops and keynote presentations, or to remind attendees to register or to
bring specific items. Attendees of a conference use Twitter to organize their trips and
share information about accommodations. For the organizers the main goal is to build
excitement for the conference and to set up a community of early adopters.
During a conference: Organizers of conferences use Twitter in this stage to keep the
attendees updated of last minute changes, organizational hints and to engage attendees
to upload pictures, links to related blog entries and so on. The way attendees use
Twitter during a conference depends on their personal preferences and styles. Some
attendees use Twitter to jot down personal notes, some to ask questions about a
presentation and other to discuss specific topics with other attendees (Ebner, 2009).
Mitchell (Mitchell, 2009) proposes to design own presentations for Twitter by setting
up a specific hashtag for the presentation and to make Twitter breaks to respond to
questions from the backchannel. She reasons to prepare own questions to send to the
Twitter backchannel in order to increase discussion and information exchange
concerning the presentation.
After a conference: The organizers of a conference most often use Twitter after the
conference to thank attendees for their presence, post reflections and interesting
statistics. They gather feedback and ideas for the next conference and spread the word
about upcoming dates. Attendees of the conference use Twitter to post links to their
blogs, where they published longer and deeper reflections about the conference. The
community of interest shares links to other interesting meetings and conferences and
often stays in touch using the hashtags from the conference.
4 Study
The following chapter introduces the purpose and design of our study and presents the
main results of the survey.
4.1 Purpose of the study
Twitter is the most used microblogging platform among individuals interested in the
area of Learning Technologies; a fact that contributed to determine which tool we
would be observing as part of our study. After observing the reality described in Costa
et al. (2008), as both delegates of similar events and active Twitterers, the researchers
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
have decided to extend their survey to other audiences and contexts within the area of
conferences. By making the survey available to various international mid- and large-
scale conferences we tried to get a deeper insight on how Twitter is used during
conferences. The individual motivation of the delegates, organizer or speakers varies
very strongly. With our study we tried to understand the motivational aspects of the
use of Twitter during conferences.
4.2 Design of the study
A generic online survey was, not focusing on the peculiarities of a specific
conference, was designed so it could be re-used in several different conferences,
workshops and meetings. For each conference the researchers attended themselves or
were interested in, a new survey was created and its URL shared via Twitter, using
the hashtag of the conference. The surveys were developed to be answered
anonymously, being its main purpose to record the individual’s own perspectives and
feelings about the use of Twitter in a conference context. All attendees of the
respective conference took part in the survey as volunteers. The survey was divided
into three different sections and comprised multiple choice, matrix, lickert scale and
open-ended questions, which enabled the researchers to survey about respondents’
gender and age, their use of Twitter before, during and after the conference, and also
about what they liked and disliked microblogging. It was also asked why they used
Twitter and what were, in their opinion and experience, the advantages and
disadvantages of using Twitter in conferences. In Total, the survey consisted of 34
questions.
4.3 Results
The results are based on data incorporated from five different conferences with 41
responses. 28 (68.3%) of the respondents were male and 13 (31.7%) were female.
Comparisons of survey results with respect to gender have been omitted as no
significant differences have been found. We also do not compare results from
different conferences because the number of responses varied too much.
!
Figure 1: Different roles of respondents at conferences.!
To learn about the respondent’s role at the conferences the survey asked for clear
information about their participation in the event. Figure 1 shows the different
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
existing roles of the respondents at the conferences and gives a visual representation
of the results of the introductory section of the survey.
The second, and main, section of the survey started by asking if respondents already
had a Twitter account. 39 (95.1%) stated to have been registered to Twitter prior to
the conference, whereas 2 (4.9%) had no account before the event. The respondents
who were Twitter users also mentioned that they use their account for personal and
professional use. Figure 2 represents the results regarding the use of Twitter for
personal and professional use. Some respondents stated that they utilized a single
Twitter account for personal and professional activities. However, 51.2% of them
reported to apply this “one account for all” policy to other communication tools as
well.
Figure 2: Twitter is employed for personal and professional use.
When asked if respondents were using Twitter to actively communicate during
conferences, 27 (67.5%) of them reported to have tweeted during the conference. In
Figure 3 nearly all of the face-to-face attendees and half of the online attendees
actively used Twitter. 74.1% of theses active Twitter users reportedly sent between
11-20 messages per day throughout the conference. Another 51.2% discussed topics
with other Twitterers by sending direct messages or replying to tweets.
Figure 3: Respondents actively tweeted during conferences.
The responses about the purpose of tweeting showed that Twitter is used in several
ways. Besides communicating with others, resources are shared through tweets,
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
parallel discussions/events are followed, notes are jotted down, the online presence is
established and enhanced, and organisational questions are raised. Figure 4 represents
the main reasons why the surveyed conference delegates used Twitter while attending
the learning event. .
When looking at the types of content sent through twitter, most tweets contained
simple plain text (median: 50%). In the messages collected, links to video resources
and images were not sent at all, whereas some tweets with links to web sites (median:
10%) were sent by the conference delegates.
We asked the participants of the survey to provide their personal opinion about
Twitter, they stated that Twitter is a very useful tool to “discuss, spread and share
information” and to build “ties of soft communities”, people shared insights on how
they changed their mind about Twitter: “I was initially very sceptical. I’ve now been
to a couple of conferences where it [Twitter] was used as a (very successful) back
channel and have really realized its potential as that.”
Figure 4: Purposes of using Twitter by attendees (role) at conferences.
The survey also included an open-ended question: ‘Why do you think Twitter
encouraged the discussion about topics?’ The answers to this open-ended question can
be clustered in 3 types: answers referring to organizational enhancements, answers
concerning the better sharing of information, and answers with respect to the easier
building of a conference-community. For example, some people who participated in
the survey answered that Twitter “gives people a greater sense of community”,
“encourages participation” and thus “in the backchannel we discussed things more
deeply than the guys on stage”.
Moreover, participants were asked about their opinion on what the added value of
tweeting in conferences were. Many answers referred to the sudden evolution of a
social network like “Twitter helps you reach out to others with similar interests,
provides networking potential, and allows people who could not attend to gain some
value from your experience”. Also, the extension of one’s own view on the
conference was seen as an added value: “You get to know unexpected but interesting
topics and persons. This emerges networking and knowledge building”. Furthermore,
the use of Twitter at a large conference (Online Educa Berlin in 2008, for example)
seemed to have “alerted delegates to the emerging issues and discussions they might
otherwise have missed”. Less positive points of view regarding the use of Twitter in a
conference setting were also uttered: “Twitter can be distracting. For people actually
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
there, they maybe spend more time with their computer or phone than talking to
people.”
5 Conclusion
Microblogging at conferences seems to be an additional way of discussing presented
topics and exchanging additional information. It is not limited to the face-to-face
audience or the location of the conference. Microblogging rather allows virtually
anyone to actively participate in the thematic debates. Our research shows that several
conference speakers and attendees are using Twitter for various purposes.
Communicating and sharing resources seem to be one of the most interesting and
relevant ways in which one microblogs. Other microblogging practices in conferences
include following parallel sessions that otherwise delegates would not have access to,
and/or would not receive such visibility. Content attached to tweets was reported to be
mostly limited to plain text and web links.
To further research on microblogging in conferences, we will have to work
closely together with organizers of conferences as to better promote microblogging as
an information channel directly associated with the event. Sending out links to the
survey during or shortly after the conference seems to be a crucial point for later
examination, as people have mostly filled out the surveys during the days of the
conference.
References
Anderson, R.J. & Anderson, R. & Vandegrift, T. & Wolfman, S. & Yasuhara, K.
(2003). Promoting interaction in large classes with computer-mediated feedback. In
Designing for change in networked learning environments (pp. 119–123).
Proceedings of CSCL, Bergen.
Balcom Group, The (2007). Twitter: A New Conference Tool. September 2007,
retrieved March 2009 from http://www.thebalcomgroup.com/node/124
Bligh, D. A. (1971). What’s the use of lecturing? Devon, England: Teaching Service
Centre, University of Exeter.
Costa, C. & Beham, G. & Reinhardt, W & Sillaots, M. (2008). Microblogging In
Technology Enhanced Learning: A Use-Case Inspection of PPE Summer School
2008. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Social Information Retrieval in Technology
Enhanced Learning (SIRTEL'08). Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Ebner, M. & Schiefner, M. (2008). Microblogging—more than fun? In Inmaculada
Arnedillo Sánchez & Pedro Isaías (Eds.), Proceedings of IADIS Mobile Learning
Conference 2008 (pp. 155–159). Portugal.
Ebner, M., Stickel, C., Scerbakov, N., Holzinger, A. (2009) A Study on the
Compatibility of Ubiquitious Learning (u-Learning) Systems at University Level,
Springer Lecture Notes in Computer Science, accepted, in print
Draft Version - Originally published in: Creativity and Innovation Competencies on
the Web, Hornung-Prähauser, V., Luckmann, M. (Ed.) Proceeding of 5. EduMedia
conference, p. 145-156, Salzburg
Ebner, M. (2009) Introducing Live Microblogging: How Single Presentations Can Be
Enhanced by the Mass. - in: Journal of research in innovative teaching, 2 (2009) 1, pp.
108 - 119
Farmer, J. & Bartlett-Bragg, A. (2005). Blogs @ anywhere: High fidelity online
communication. Proceedings of the ASCILITE Conference (pp. 197–203). Perth,
Australia.
Gleason, M. (1986) Better communication in large courses, College Teaching, 34 (1),
p.20-24
Griswold, W. G. (2007). Five enablers for Mobile 2.0, Computer, 40(10), 96–98.
Java, A., Finin, T., Song, X., & Tseng, B. (2007). Why we twitter: Understanding
microblogging usage and communities. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
Joint 9th WEBKDD and 1st SNA-KDD Workshop
Karger, D. R., Quan, D (2005). What would it mean to blog on the semantic Web?.
Web Semantics: Sciences, Services and Agents on the World Wide Web 3, pp. 147-
157
Kolbitsch, J., 2007, Kōrero: An Integrated, Community-Based Platform for
Collaboration, International Conference on Knowledge Management (ICMK'07),
Vienna, Austria, August 27th-28th, 2007, pp. 1-13,
http://www.kolbitsch.org/research/papers/2007-Korero.pdf (last visited February
2009)
McFedries, P. (2007, October). All a-twitter, IEE Spectrum, p. 84.
Mitchell, O. (2009). 8 things I learnt about using twitter as a participation tool. March
2009, retrieved March 2009 from
http://www.speakingaboutpresenting.com/audience/twitter-participation-presentation/
O’Reilly, T. (2005) What is Web 2.0 – Design Patterns and Business Models for the
Next Generation in Software,
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html
(last visited January 2009)
Schmidt, J.; Schönberger, K; Stegbauer, C. (2005) Erkundungen von Weblogs –
Anmerkungen zum Stand der Forschung, kommunikation@gesellschaft 6, 2005, 4,
pp.1-20
Stevens, V. (2008). Trial by twitter: The rise and slide of the year’s most viral mi-
croblogging platform. June 2008, retrieved March 2009 from http://tesl-
ej.org/ej45/int.html
Walker, J. (2003). Weblog. Definition for the Routledge Encyclopedia of Narrative
Theory, retrieved March 2009 from
http://jilltxt.net/archives/blog_theorising/final_version_of_weblog_definition.html
