ArticleFrontiers in artificial intelligence2021
Social Networks of Lexical Innovation. Investigating the Social Dynamics of Diffusion of Neologisms on Twitter.
Article in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Societies continually evolve and speakers use new words to talk about innovative products and practices. While most lexical innovations soon fall into disuse, others spread successfully and become part of the lexicon. In this paper, I conduct a longitudinal study of the spread of 99 English neologisms on Twitter to study their degrees and pathways of diffusion. Previous work on lexical innovation has almost exclusively relied on usage frequency for investigating the spread of new words. To get a more differentiated picture of diffusion, I use frequency-based measures to study temporal aspects of diffusion and I use network analyses for a more detailed and accurate investigation of the sociolinguistic dynamics of diffusion. The results show that frequency measures manage to capture diffusion with varying success. Frequency counts can serve as an approximate indicator for overall degrees of diffusion, yet they miss important information about the temporal usage profiles of lexical innovations. The results indicate that neologisms with similar total frequency can exhibit significantly different degrees of diffusion. Analysing differences in their temporal dynamics of use with regard to their age, trends in usage intensity, and volatility contributes to a more accurate account of their diffusion. The results obtained from the social network analysis reveal substantial differences in the social pathways of diffusion. Social diffusion significantly correlates with the frequency and temporal usage profiles of neologisms. However, the network visualisations and metrics identify neologisms whose degrees of social diffusion are more limited than suggested by their overall frequency of use. These include, among others, highly volatile neologisms (e.g.,
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.