Are You What You Tweet? The Impact of Sentiment on Digital News Consumption and Social Media Sharing

References

• Adamopoulos P, Ghose A, Todri V (2018) The impact of user personality traits on word of mouth: Text-mining social media platforms. Inform. Systems Res. 29(3):612–640.Link, Google Scholar
• AdSpeed (2010) How much to charge for advertising on your website? April 21, https://www.adspeed.com/Blog/How-much-charge-advertising-website-1104.html.Google Scholar
• Aggarwal R, Gopal R, Sankaranarayanan R, Singh PV (2012) Blog, blogger, and the firm: Can negative posts by employees lead to positive outcomes? Inform. Systems Res. 23(2):306–322.Link, Google Scholar
• Allcott H, Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J. Econom. Perspect. 31(2):211–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Altheide D (1997) The news media, the problem frame, and the production of fear. Sociol. Quart. 38(4):647–668.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baden D, McIntyre K, Homberg F (2019) The impact of constructive news on affective and behavioural responses. Journalism Stud. 20(13):1940–1959.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baltagi BH, Bresson G, Pirotte A (2003) Fixed effects, random effects or Hausman–Taylor? A pretest estimator. Econom. Lett. 79(3):361–369.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barasch A, Berger J (2014) Broadcasting and narrowcasting: How audience size affects what people share. J. Marketing Res. 51(3):286–299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF (1982) A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psych. Bull. 91(1):3–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Hutton DG (1987) Self-presentation theory: Self-construction and audience pleasing. Mullen B, Goethals GR, eds. Theories of Group Behavior (Springer, New York), 71–87.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva M, Morikawa T (1990) Estimation of switching models from revealed preferences and stated intentions. Transportation Res. Part A General 24(6):485–495.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berger J, Milkman K (2012) What makes online content viral? J. Marketing Res. 49(2):192–205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beshears J, Choi JJ, Laibson D, Madrian BC (2008) How are preferences revealed? J. Public Econom. 92(8–9):1787–1794.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhattacharya P, Phan TQ, Bai X, Airoldi EM (2019) A coevolution model of network structure and user behavior: The case of content generation in online social networks. Inform. Systems Res. 30(1):117–132.Link, Google Scholar
• Blei DM, Ng AY, Jordan MI (2003) Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Machine Learning Res. 3:993–1022.Google Scholar
• Bobkowski PS (2015) Sharing the news: Effects of informational utility and opinion leadership on online news sharing. Journalism Mass Comm. Quart. 92(2):320–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boczkowski PJ, Mitchelstein E (2013) The News Gap: When the Information Preferences of the Media and the Public Diverge (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bright J (2016) The social news gap: How news reading and news sharing diverge. J. Comm. 66(3):343–365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Büschken J, Allenby GM (2016) Sentence-based text analysis for customer reviews. Marketing Sci. 35(6):953–975.Google Scholar
• Centre for Media Transition (2018) The Impact of Digital Platforms on News and Journalistic Content. Retrieved November 28, 2019, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/ACCC%20commissioned%20report%20-%20The%20impact%20of%20digital%20platforms%20on%20news%20and%20journalistic%20content%2C%20Centre%20for%20Media%20Transition%20%282%29.pdf.Google Scholar
• Cha M, Haddadi H, Benevenuto F, Gummadi KP (2010) Measuring user influence in Twitter: The million follower fallacy. Proc. Fourth Internat, AAAI Conf. Weblogs Soc. Media (AAAI, Palo Alto, CA), 10–17.Google Scholar
• Chakraborty A, Ghosh S, Ganguly N, Gummadi KP (2019) Editorial vs. audience gatekeeping: Analyzing news selection and consumption dynamics in online news media. IEEE Trans. Comput. Soc. Systems 6(4):680–691.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Conley TG, Hansen CB, Rossi PE (2012) Plausibly exogenous. Rev. Econom. Statist. 94(1):260–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coppock A (2017) Did shy Trump supporters bias the 2016 Polls? Evidence from a nationally-representative list experiment. J. Statist. Politics Policy 8(1):29–40.Google Scholar
• Crowne D, Marlowe D (1964) The Approval Motive (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• Davie WR, Lee JS (1995) Sex, violence, and consonance/differentiation: An analysis of local TV news values. Journalism Mass Comm. Quart. 72(1):128–138.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Das SR, Chen MY (2007) Yahoo! for Amazon: Sentiment extraction from small talk on the web. Management Sci. 53(9):1375–1388.Link, Google Scholar
• Datta H, Foubert B, Van Heerde HJ (2015) The challenge of retaining customers acquired with free trials. J. Marketing Res. 52(2):217–234.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C, Katona Z, Rand W (2013) Media, aggregators and the link economy: Strategic hyperlink formation in content networks. Management Sci. 59(10):2360–2379.Link, Google Scholar
• Dellarocas C, Sutanto J, Calin M, Palme E (2016) Attention allocation in information-rich environments: The case of news aggregators. Management Sci. 62(9):2543–2562.Link, Google Scholar
• Digman JM (1990) Personality structure: Emergence of the five-factor model. Annual Rev. Psych. 41(1):417–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Frank KA, Maroulis SJ, Duong MQ, Kelcey BM (2013) What would it take to change an inference? Using Rubin’s causal model to interpret the robustness of causal inferences. Ed. Evaluation Policy Anal. 35(4):437–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galician ML, Pasternack S (1987) Balancing good news and bad news: An ethical obligation? J. Mass Media Ethics 2(2):82–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gans HJ (2010) News & the news media in the digital age: Implications for democracy. Daedalus 139(2):8–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Garcia D (2013) Sentiment during recessions. J. Finance 68(3):1267–1300.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gentzkow M, Shapiro JM (2010) What drives media slant? Evidence from US daily newspapers. Econometrica 78(1):35–71.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Godes D, Mayzlin D (2004) Using online conversations to study word-of-mouth communication. Marketing Sci. 23(4):545–560.Link, Google Scholar
• Goffman E (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (Doubleday, New York).Google Scholar
• Goh KY, Heng CS, Lin Z (2013) Social media brand community and consumer behavior: Quantifying the relative impact of user- and marketer-generated content. Inform. Systems Res. 24(1):88–107.Link, Google Scholar
• Goh KY, Hui KL, Png IPL (2011) Newspaper reports and consumer choice: Evidence from the do not call registry. Management Sci. 57(9):1640–1654.Link, Google Scholar
• Goldberg LR (1981) Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. Rev. Personality Soc. Psych. 2(1):141–165.Google Scholar
• Goldenberg J, Han S, Lehmann DR, Hong JW (2009) The role of hubs in the adoption process. J. Marketing 73:1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gonzales AL, Hancock JT (2011) Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsych. Behav. Soc. Networks 14(1–2):79–83.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Griffiths TL, Steyvers M (2004) Finding scientific topics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101(1):5228–5235.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guardian (2016) The real ‘shy Trump’ vote—how 53% of white women pushed him to victory (November 10), https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/10/white-women-donald-trump-victory.Google Scholar
• Hensher DA, Bradley M (1993) Using stated response choice data to enrich revealed preference discrete choice models. Marketing Lett. 4(2):139–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hill S, Nalavade A, Benton A (2012) Social TV: Real-time social media response to TV advertising. Proc. Sixth Internat. Workshop Data Mining Online Advertising Internet Econom. (ACM, New York), 1–9.Google Scholar
• Holbrook A, Krosnick JA (2010) Social desirability bias in voter turnout reports: Tests using the item count technique. Public Opinion Quart. 74(1):37–67.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hong S, Nadler D (2012) Which candidates do the public discuss online in an election campaign? The use of social media by 2012 presidential candidates and its impact on candidate salience. Government Inform. Quart. 29(4):455–461.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Horsky D, Nelson P, Posavac SS (2004) Stating preference for the ethereal but choosing the concrete: How the tangibility of attributes affects attribute weighting in value elicitation and choice. J. Consumer Psych. 14(1–2):132–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Huang A, Lehavy R, Zang A, Zheng R (2017) Analyst information discovery and information interpretation roles: A topic modeling approach. Management Sci. 64(6):2833–2855.Link, Google Scholar
• Kankanhalli A, Tan BCY, Wei KK (2005) Contributing knowledge to electronic knowledge repositories: An empirical investigation. MIS Quart. 29(1):113–143.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kinnick K, Krugman DM, Cameron GT (1996) Compassion fatigue: Communication and burnout toward social problems. Journalism Mass Comm. Quart. 73(3):687–707.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kümpel AS, Karnowski V, Keyling T (2015) News sharing in social media: A review of current research on news sharing users, content, and networks. Soc. Media Soc. 1(2):1–14.Google Scholar
• Kwak H, Lee C, Park H, Moon S (2010) What is Twitter, a social network or a news media? Proc. 19th Internet Conf. World Wide Web (ACM, New York), 591–600.Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR, Wolf R (2005) Why hackers do what they do: Understanding motivation and effort in free/open source software projects. Feller J, Fitzgerald B, Hissam S, Lakhani KR, eds. Perspectives on Free and Open Source Software (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Lee TY, Bradlow ET (2011) Automated marketing research using online customer reviews. J. Marketing Res. 48(5):881–894.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee CS, Ma L (2012) News sharing in social media: The effect of gratifications and prior experience. Comput. Human Behav. 28(2):331–339.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee D, Hosanagar K, Nair H (2018) Advertising content and consumer engagement on social media: Evidence from Facebook. Management Sci. 64(11):5105–5131.Link, Google Scholar
• Lewis RA, Reiley DH (2013) Down-to-the-minute effects of super bowl advertising on online search behavior. Proc. 14th ACM Conf. Electronic Commerce (ACM, New York), 639–656.Google Scholar
• Li Z, Agarwal A (2016) Platform integration and demand spillovers in complementary markets: Evidence from Facebook’s integration of Instagram. Management Sci. 63(10):3438–3458.Link, Google Scholar
• Lin SC, Su WY, Chien PC, Tsai MF, Wang CJ (2020) Self-attentive sentimental sentence embedding for sentiment analysis. Proc. IEEE Internat. Conf. Acoustics Speech Signal Processing (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ), 1678–1682.Google Scholar
• Ludwig S, Ruyter K, Friedman M, Bruggen E, Wetzels M, Pfann G (2013) More than words: The influence of affective content and linguistic style matches in online reviews on conversion rates. J. Marketing 77:87–103.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McBrian CD (1978) Language and social stratification: The case of a Confucian society. Anthropological Linguistics 20(7):320–326.Google Scholar
• McIntyre K, Gyldensted C (2017) Constructive journalism: An introduction and practical guide for applying positive psychology techniques to news production. J. Media Innovations 4(2):20–34.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moe W (2006) An empirical two-stage choice model with decision rules applied to internet clickstream data. J. Marketing Res. 43(4):680–692.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mohammad SM (2016) Sentiment analysis: Detecting valence, emotions, and other affectual states from text. Meiselman HL, ed. Emotion Measurement (Woodhead, Sawston, UK), 201–237.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oh H, Animesh A, Pinsonneault A (2016) Free vs. for-a-fee: The impact of a paywall on the pattern and effectiveness of word-of-mouth via social media. MIS Quart. 40(1):31–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pang B, Lee L (2005) Seeing starts: Exploiting class relationships for sentiment categorization with respect to rating scales. Proc. 43rd Annual Meeting Assoc. Comput. Linguistics (Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA), 115–124.Google Scholar
• Park S, Gupta S (2012) Handling endogenous regressors by joint estimation using copulas. Marketing Sci. 31(4):567–586.Link, Google Scholar
• Patterson TE (1997) The news media: An effective political actor? Political Comm. 14(4):445–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paulhus DL, Trapnell PD (2008) Self-presentation of personality: An agency-communion framework. John OP, Robins RW, Pervin LA, eds. Handbook of Personality: Theory and Research (Guilford Press, New York), 492–517.Google Scholar
• Pennebaker JW, Booth RJ, Boyd RL, Francis ME (2015) Linguistic inquiry and word count: LIWC2015, http://liwc.net.Google Scholar
• Protalinski E (2018) Shareaholic: Search overtook social for referral traffic in 2017 as Google passed Facebook. VentureBeat (February 22), https://venturebeat.com/2018/02/22/shareaholic-search-overtook-social-for-referral-traffic-in-2017-as-google-passed-facebook/.Google Scholar
• Qiao M, Huang KW (2021) Correcting misclassification bias in regression models with variables generated via data mining. Inform. Systems Res. 32(2):462–480.Link, Google Scholar
• Rehurek R, Sojka P (2010) Software framework for topic modelling with large corpora. Proc. LREC 2010 Workshop New Challenges NLP Frameworks, Valletta, Malta (May 22) 46–50.Google Scholar
• Rickford JR (1986) The need for new approaches to social class analysis in sociolinguistics. Language Comm. 6(3):215–221.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Roberts JA, Hann IH, Slaughter S (2006) Understanding the motivations, participation, and performance of open source software developers: A longitudinal study of the Apache projects. Management Sci. 52(7):984–999.Link, Google Scholar
• Rubin DB (1974) Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies. J. Ed. Psych. 66(5):688–701.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schau HJ, Gilly MC (2003) We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. J. Consumer Res. 30(3):385–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shi Z, Rui H, Whinston AB (2013) Content sharing in a social broadcasting environment: Evidence from Twitter. MIS Quart. 38(1):123–142.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shoemaker PJ (1996) Hardwired for news: Using biological and cultural evolution to explain the surveillance function. J. Comm. 46(3):32–47.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shoemaker PJ, Danielian LH, Brendlinger N (1991) Deviant acts, risky business and U.S. interests: The newsworthiness of world events. Journalism Quart. 68(4):781–795.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Singh PV, Sahoo N, Mukhopadhyay T (2014) How to attract and retain readers in enterprise blogging. Inform. Systems Res. 25(1):35–52.Link, Google Scholar
• Socher R, Perelygin A, Wu JY, Chuang J, Manning CD, Ng AY, Potts C (2013) Recursive deep models for semantic compositionality over a sentiment treebank. Proc. Conf. Empirical Methods Natural Language Processing (Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA), 1642–1660.Google Scholar
• Soroka SN (2006) Good news and bad news: Asymmetric responses to economic information. J. Politics 68(2):372–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stock JH, Yogo M (2005) Testing for weak instruments in linear IV regression. Andrews DWK, Stock JH eds. Identification and Inference in Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas J. Rothenberg (Cambridge University Press, New York), 80–108.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Szabo A, Hopkinson KL (2007) Negative psychological effects of watching the news in the television: Relaxation or another intervention may be needed to buffer them! Internat. J. Behav. Medicine 14(2):57–62.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor C (2010) Newspapers online traffic is strong, so why are ad rates weak? CBS News (June 29), https://www.cbsnews.com/news/newspapers-online-traffic-is-strong-so-why-are-ad-rates-weak/.Google Scholar
• Toubia O, Stephen A (2013) Intrinsic vs. image-related utility in social media: Why do people contribute content to Twitter? Marketing Sci. 32(3):368–392.Link, Google Scholar
• Trusov M, Bodapati AV, Bucklin RE (2010) Determining influential users in internet social networks. J. Marketing Res. 47(4):643–658.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tumasjan A, Sprenger TO, Sandner PG, Welpe IM (2011) Election forecasts with Twitter: How 140 characters reflect the political landscape. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 29(4):402–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vaccari C, Chadwick A, O’Loughlin B (2015) Dual screening the political: Media events, social media, and citizen engagement. J. Comm. 65(6):1041–1061.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Walther JB, Loh T, Granka L (2005) Let me count the ways: The interchange of verbal and nonverbal cues in computer-mediated and face-to-face affinity. J. Language Soc. Psych. 24(1):36–65.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wasko MM, Faraj S (2005) Why should I share? Examining social capital and knowledge contribution in electronic networks of practice. MIS Quart. 29(1):35–57.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Webb R (2017) Social media is killing the news. Medium (August 31), https://medium.com/s/which-half-is-wasted/social-media-is-killing-the-news-ae91c4a1add8.Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (2002) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Xu R, Frank KA, Maroulis SJ, Rosenberg JM (2019) konfound: Command to quantify robustness of causal inferences. Stata J. 19(3):523–550.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yang M, Adomavicius G, Burtch G, Ren Y (2018) Mind the gap: Accounting for measurement error and misclassification in variables generated via data mining. Inform. Systems Res. 29(1):4–24.Link, Google Scholar
• Zhang XM, Zhu F (2011) Group size and incentives to contribute: A natural experiment at Chinese Wikipedia. Amer. Econom. Rev. 101:1601–1615.Crossref, Google Scholar