the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Content Analysis of Multi-Annual Time Series of Flood-Related Twitter (X) Data
Abstract. Social media can provide insights into natural hazard events and people's emergency responses. In this study, we present a natural language processing analytic framework to extract and categorize information from of 43,287 Twitter (X) posts in German since 2014. We implement Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers in combination with unsupervised clustering techniques (BERTopic) to automatically extract social media content, addressing transferability issues that arise from commonly used bag-of-word representations. We analyze the temporal evolution of topic patterns, reflecting behaviors and perceptions of citizens before, during, and after flood events. Topics related to low-impact riverine flooding contain descriptive hazard-related content, while the focus shifts to catastrophic impacts and responsibilities during high-impact events. Our analytical framework enables analyzing temporal dynamics of citizens’ behaviors and perceptions which can facilitate lessons learned analyses and improve risk communication and management.
- Preprint
(1004 KB) - Metadata XML
-
Supplement
(470 KB) - BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: open (until 12 Oct 2024)
-
CC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-2556', Knut Seip, 02 Sep 2024
reply
Dear Authors
The study was impressive, and must have required much work. I was just curious if you have compared your results to information from Google trends. I just tried Google trends on the term "hydrology" in Germany and got a peak on October 2010. Maybe the information in Google trends will be quite irrelevant?
Best wishes with your studies
Knut L. Seip
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2556-CC1 -
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Nadja Veigel, 03 Sep 2024
reply
Dear Knut L. Seip,
We appreciate you reading the preprint and giving our work such a positive review. Since Google Trends already provides the themes and aggregates them based on search phrases, we haven't directly compared the results to Google Trends. As per your recommendation, I examined the Google Trends data for the specified timeframe and the search phrases (German terms for "flooding": "Hochwasser," "Flut," "Überflutung") that were included in our preprint. The comparison may be seen in the attached file, which is an extended version of Figure 2 from the preprint with Google Trends added in red. Local events are underreported on Google, with the exception of events receiving national media attention, such as those that occurred in 2010 and 2021. Many of the events we found in the Twitter data are not identifiable in the Google Trends data or the monthly time step in which Google delivers the data.
Kind Regards
Nadja Veigel
-
CC2: 'REGUSPHERE-2024-2556', Knut Seip, 03 Sep 2024
reply
Dear Nadja
I very much appreciate your response, and it was interesting to see the comparison between the two methods. To me, the Google trend results were surprisingly good (but yours were better). Maybe it is done before, but I have never seen a comparison of twitter (X)data and Google trend data before. I have a second question, is there any policy implications of your results? (I once wrote in a policy journal, and they asked me to have a final section: "policy implications". I thought that was a good idea. Please note, you do not have to bother with responding to this question. I am just curious.
Best wishes Knut
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-2556-CC2
-
CC2: 'REGUSPHERE-2024-2556', Knut Seip, 03 Sep 2024
reply
-
AC1: 'Reply on CC1', Nadja Veigel, 03 Sep 2024
reply
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | Supplement | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
118 | 27 | 7 | 152 | 9 | 3 | 3 |
- HTML: 118
- PDF: 27
- XML: 7
- Total: 152
- Supplement: 9
- BibTeX: 3
- EndNote: 3
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1