Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
19
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.7.1
Dataset results
19 results for “tech media”
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media (01.2016-04.2021)
<p>Sources with weights</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues have been selected (e.g. 'metoo', 'gdpr')</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul>
Keyword frequencies in popular tech media (01.2016-04.2021)
<p>Sources with weights</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of all terms (for every month and source) </li> <li>Several media sources: a representative index is calculated with weighted average (weights as above)</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of months since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2016) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed month (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest monthly growth</li> </ul> <p>Columns</p> <p>freq_months (e.g. freq_2019-04): the average frequency of the term</p> <p>coef: the regression coefficient</p> <p>coef_norm: the regression coefficient divided by the mean frequency of the keyword</p>
Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis during the COVID-19 pandemic (01.2020-06.2020)
<p><strong>Sources: </strong></p> <ul> <li>Euractiv</li> <li>The Conversation</li> <li>Politico Europe </li> <li>IEEE Spectrum </li> <li>Techforge </li> <li>Fastcompany </li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) </li> <li>Arstechnica </li> <li>Reuters </li> <li>Gizmodo </li> <li>ZDNet </li> <li>The Register </li> <li>The Verge </li> <li>TechCrunch </li> </ul> <p> </p> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <p>The sentiment analysis has been prepared using VADER*, an open-source lexicon and rule-based sentiment analysis tool. VADER is specifically designed for social media analysis, but can be also applied for other text sources. The sentiment lexicon was compiled using various sources (other sentiment data sets, Twitter etc.) and was validated by human input. The advantage of VADER is that the rule-based engine includes word-order sensitive relations and degree modifiers.</p> <p>As VADER is more robust in the case of shorter social media texts, the analysed articles have been divided into paragraphs. The analysis have been carried out for the social issues presented in the co-occurrence exercise.</p> <p>The process included the following main steps:</p> <ul> <li>The 100 most frequently co-occurring terms are identified for every social issue (using the co-occurrence methodology)</li> <li>The articles containing the given social issue and co-occurring term are identified</li> <li>The identified articles are divided into paragraphs</li> <li>Social issue and co-occurring words are removed from the paragraph</li> <li>The VADER sentiment analysis is carried out for every identified and modified paragraph</li> <li>The average for the given word pair is calculated for the final result</li> </ul> <p>Therefore, the procedure has been repeated for 100 words for all identified social issues.</p> <p>The sentiment analysis resulted in a compound score for every paragraph. The score is calculated from the sum of the valence scores of each word in the paragraph, and normalised between the values -1 (most extreme negative) and +1 (most extreme positive). Finally, the average is calculated from the paragraph results. Removal of terms is meant to exclude sentiment of the co-occurring word itself, because the word may be misleading, e.g. when some technologies or companies attempt to solve a negative issue. The neighbourhood's scores would be positive, but the negative term would bring the paragraph's score down.</p> <p>The analysed paragraphs are selected the following way:</p> <ul> <li>The articles containing the given social issue are identified</li> <li>The paragraphs containing the social issue are selected for sentiment analysis</li> </ul> <p>*Hutto, C.J. & Gilbert, E.E. (2014). VADER: A Parsimonious Rule-based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social Media Text. Eighth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-14). Ann Arbor, MI, June 2014.</p>
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media during the COVID-19 pandemic (01.2020-06.2020)
<p>Sources: </p> <ul> <li>Euractiv</li> <li>The Conversation</li> <li>Politico Europe </li> <li>IEEE Spectrum </li> <li>Techforge </li> <li>Fastcompany </li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) </li> <li>Arstechnica </li> <li>Reuters </li> <li>Gizmodo </li> <li>ZDNet </li> <li>The Register </li> <li>The Verge </li> <li>TechCrunch </li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues and technologies have been selected (e.g. covid19)</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul>
Keyword frequencies in popular tech media during the COVID-19 pandemic (01.2020-06.2020)
<p>Sources: </p> <ul> <li>Euractiv</li> <li>The Conversation</li> <li>Politico Europe </li> <li>IEEE Spectrum </li> <li>Techforge </li> <li>Fastcompany </li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) </li> <li>Arstechnica </li> <li>Reuters </li> <li>Gizmodo </li> <li>ZDNet </li> <li>The Register </li> <li>The Verge </li> <li>TechCrunch </li> </ul> <p>Methodology is modified relative to the regular trend analysis due to the short period of analysis (weekly freqiencies)</p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of all terms (for every week) </li> <li>Several media sources: all articles are treated equally</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of weeks since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2020) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed week (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest weekly growth</li> </ul> <p>Columns</p> <p>freq_2020_weeks (e.g. freq_2020_ww0): the average frequency of the term</p> <p>coef: the regression coefficient</p> <p>coef_norm: the regression coefficient divided by the mean frequency of the keyword</p>
Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis
<p><strong>Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis</strong></p> <p><strong>Sources</strong>: Above 140k articles (01.2016-03.2019):</p> <ul> <li>Gigaom 0.5%</li> <li>Euractiv 0.9%</li> <li>The Conversation 1.3%</li> <li>Politico Europe 1.3%</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 1.8%</li> <li>Techforge 4.3%</li> <li>Fastcompany 4.5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 9.2%</li> <li>Arstechnica 10.0%</li> <li>Reuters 11%</li> <li>Gizmodo 17.5%</li> <li>ZDNet 18.3%</li> <li>The Register 19.5%</li> </ul> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <p>The sentiment analysis has been prepared using VADER*, an open-source lexicon and rule-based sentiment analysis tool. VADER is specifically designed for social media analysis, but can be also applied for other text sources. The sentiment lexicon was compiled using various sources (other sentiment data sets, Twitter etc.) and was validated by human input. The advantage of VADER is that the rule-based engine includes word-order sensitive relations and degree modifiers.</p> <p>As VADER is more robust in the case of shorter social media texts, the analysed articles have been divided into paragraphs. The analysis have been carried out for the social issues presented in the co-occurrence exercise.</p> <p>The process included the following main steps:</p> <ul> <li>The 100 most frequently co-occurring terms are identified for every social issue (using the co-occurrence methodology)</li> <li>The articles containing the given social issue and co-occurring term are identified</li> <li>The identified articles are divided into paragraphs</li> <li>Social issue and co-occurring words are removed from the paragraph</li> <li>The VADER sentiment analysis is carried out for every identified and modified paragraph</li> <li>The average for the given word pair is calculated for the final result</li> </ul> <p>Therefore, the procedure has been repeated for 100 words for all identified social issues.</p> <p>The sentiment analysis resulted in a compound score for every paragraph. The score is calculated from the sum of the valence scores of each word in the paragraph, and normalised between the values -1 (most extreme negative) and +1 (most extreme positive). Finally, the average is calculated from the paragraph results. Removal of terms is meant to exclude sentiment of the co-occurring word itself, because the word may be misleading, e.g. when some technologies or companies attempt to solve a negative issue. The neighbourhood's scores would be positive, but the negative term would bring the paragraph's score down.</p> <p>The presented tables include the most extreme co-occurring terms for the analysed social issue. The examples are chosen from the list of words with 30 most positive and 30 most negative sentiment. The presented graphs show the evolution of sentiments for social issues. The analysed paragraphs are selected the following way:</p> <ul> <li>The articles containing the given social issue are identified</li> <li>The paragraphs containing the social issue are selected for sentiment analysis</li> </ul> <p>*Hutto, C.J. & Gilbert, E.E. (2014). VADER: A Parsimonious Rule-based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social Media Text. Eighth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-14). Ann Arbor, MI, June 2014.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Files</strong></p> <p>sentiments_mod11.csv sentiment score based on chosen unigrams</p> <p>sentiments_mod22.csv sentiment score based on chosen bigrams</p> <p>sentiments_cooc_mod11.csv, sentiments_cooc_mod12.csv, sentiments_cooc_mod21.csv, sentiments_cooc_mod22.csv combinations of co-occurrences: unigrams-unigrams, unigrams-bigrams, bigrams-unigrams, bigrams-bigrams</p> <p> </p>
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media
<p><strong>Co-occurrences of trending keywords in the tech media (01.2016-03.2019)</strong></p> <p><strong>Sources</strong></p> <ul> <li>Gigaom 0.5%</li> <li>Euractiv 0.9%</li> <li>The Conversation 1.3%</li> <li>Politico Europe 1.3%</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 1.8%</li> <li>Techforge 4.3%</li> <li>Fastcompany 4.5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 9.2%</li> <li>Arstechnica 10.0%</li> <li>Reuters 11%</li> <li>Gizmodo 17.5%</li> <li>ZDNet 18.3%</li> <li>The Register 19.5%</li> </ul> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues have been selected (e.g. 'metoo', 'gdpr')</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul> <p><strong>Files</strong></p> <p>unigram-unigram co-occurrences: cooc11weighted.csv</p> <p>unigram-bigram co-occurrences: cooc12weighted.csv</p> <p>bigram-unigram co-occurrences: cooc21weighted.csv</p> <p>bigram-bigram co-occurrences: cooc22weighted.csv<br> </p> <p> </p>
Keyword frequency in popular tech media
<p><strong>Keywords trending in the tech media (01.2016-03.2019)</strong></p> <p><strong>Sources</strong></p> <ul> <li>Gigaom 0.5%</li> <li>Euractiv 0.9%</li> <li>The Conversation 1.3%</li> <li>Politico Europe 1.3%</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 1.8%</li> <li>Techforge 4.3%</li> <li>Fastcompany 4.5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 9.2%</li> <li>Arstechnica 10.0%</li> <li>Reuters 11%</li> <li>Gizmodo 17.5%</li> <li>ZDNet 18.3%</li> <li>The Register 19.5%</li> </ul> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of published articles (for every month and source)</li> <li>This measure reveals how many times an expression has been mentioned on average per article</li> <li>Several media sources: a representative index is calculated with weighted average</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of months since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2016) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed month (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest monthly growth</li> </ul> <p><strong>Files</strong></p> <ul> <li>unigrams: coefs_1weighted_site.csv</li> <li>bigrams: coefs_2weighted_site.csv</li> </ul> <p> </p>
Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis (01.2016-12.2019)
<p>Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis</p> <p>Sources with weights:</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <p>The sentiment analysis has been prepared using VADER*, an open-source lexicon and rule-based sentiment analysis tool. VADER is specifically designed for social media analysis, but can be also applied for other text sources. The sentiment lexicon was compiled using various sources (other sentiment data sets, Twitter etc.) and was validated by human input. The advantage of VADER is that the rule-based engine includes word-order sensitive relations and degree modifiers.</p> <p>As VADER is more robust in the case of shorter social media texts, the analysed articles have been divided into paragraphs. The analysis have been carried out for the social issues presented in the co-occurrence exercise.</p> <p>The process included the following main steps:</p> <ul> <li>The 100 most frequently co-occurring terms are identified for every social issue (using the co-occurrence methodology)</li> <li>The articles containing the given social issue and co-occurring term are identified</li> <li>The identified articles are divided into paragraphs</li> <li>Social issue and co-occurring words are removed from the paragraph</li> <li>The VADER sentiment analysis is carried out for every identified and modified paragraph</li> <li>The average for the given word pair is calculated for the final result</li> </ul> <p>Therefore, the procedure has been repeated for 100 words for all identified social issues.</p> <p>The sentiment analysis resulted in a compound score for every paragraph. The score is calculated from the sum of the valence scores of each word in the paragraph, and normalised between the values -1 (most extreme negative) and +1 (most extreme positive). Finally, the average is calculated from the paragraph results. Removal of terms is meant to exclude sentiment of the co-occurring word itself, because the word may be misleading, e.g. when some technologies or companies attempt to solve a negative issue. The neighbourhood's scores would be positive, but the negative term would bring the paragraph's score down.</p> <p> </p> <p>*Hutto, C.J. & Gilbert, E.E. (2014). VADER: A Parsimonious Rule-based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social Media Text. Eighth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-14). Ann Arbor, MI, June 2014.</p>
Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis (01.2016-04.2021)
<p>Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis</p> <p>Sources with weights:</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <p>The sentiment analysis has been prepared using VADER*, an open-source lexicon and rule-based sentiment analysis tool. VADER is specifically designed for social media analysis, but can be also applied for other text sources. The sentiment lexicon was compiled using various sources (other sentiment data sets, Twitter etc.) and was validated by human input. The advantage of VADER is that the rule-based engine includes word-order sensitive relations and degree modifiers.</p> <p>As VADER is more robust in the case of shorter social media texts, the analysed articles have been divided into paragraphs. The analysis have been carried out for the social issues presented in the co-occurrence exercise.</p> <p>The process included the following main steps:</p> <ul> <li>The 100 most frequently co-occurring terms are identified for every social issue (using the co-occurrence methodology)</li> <li>The articles containing the given social issue and co-occurring term are identified</li> <li>The identified articles are divided into paragraphs</li> <li>Social issue and co-occurring words are removed from the paragraph</li> <li>The VADER sentiment analysis is carried out for every identified and modified paragraph</li> <li>The average for the given word pair is calculated for the final result</li> </ul> <p>Therefore, the procedure has been repeated for 100 words for all identified social issues.</p> <p>The sentiment analysis resulted in a compound score for every paragraph. The score is calculated from the sum of the valence scores of each word in the paragraph, and normalised between the values -1 (most extreme negative) and +1 (most extreme positive). Finally, the average is calculated from the paragraph results. Removal of terms is meant to exclude sentiment of the co-occurring word itself, because the word may be misleading, e.g. when some technologies or companies attempt to solve a negative issue. The neighbourhood's scores would be positive, but the negative term would bring the paragraph's score down.</p> <p> </p> <p>*Hutto, C.J. & Gilbert, E.E. (2014). VADER: A Parsimonious Rule-based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social Media Text. Eighth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-14). Ann Arbor, MI, June 2014.</p>
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media (01.2016-04.2019)
<p>Sources with weights</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues have been selected (e.g. 'metoo', 'gdpr')</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul> <p> </p>
Keyword frequencies in popular tech media (01.2016-04.2019)
<p><strong>Sources with weights</strong></p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of published articles (for every month and source)</li> <li>This measure reveals how many times an expression has been mentioned on average per article</li> <li>Several media sources: a representative index is calculated with weighted average (weights as above)</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of months since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2016) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed month (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest monthly growth</li> </ul> <p><strong>Files</strong></p> <p>The dataset contains two files:</p> <p>Unigrams: coefs_1weighted_site.csv</p> <p>Bigrams: coefs_2weighted_site.csv</p> <p><strong>Columns</strong></p> <p>freq_months (e.g. freq_2019-04): the average frequency of the term</p> <p>coef: the regression coefficient</p> <p>coef_norm: the regression coefficient divided by the mean frequency of the keyword</p> <p>coef_norm_max: the regression coefficient divided by the maximum frequency of the keyword</p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media (01.2016-02.2020)
<p><strong>Sources with weights</strong></p> <pre> Arstechnica: 1/8, Euractiv: 1/8, Fastcompany: 1/8, The Register: 1/8, Techcrunch: 1/8, The Guardian: 1/8, Venturebeat: 1/8, The Verge: 1/8</pre> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues and technologies have been selected (e.g. 'gdpr', '5G')</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul>
Keyword frequencies in popular tech media (01.2016-02.2020)
<p><strong>Sources with weights</strong></p> <pre> Arstechnica: 1/8, Euractiv: 1/8, Fastcompany: 1/8, The Register: 1/8, Techcrunch: 1/8, The Guardian: 1/8, Venturebeat: 1/8, The Verge: 1/8 </pre> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of published articles (for every month and source)</li> <li>This measure reveals how many times an expression has been mentioned on average per article</li> <li>Several media sources: a representative index is calculated with weighted average (weights as above)</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of months since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2016) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed month (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest monthly growth</li> </ul> <p><strong>Columns</strong></p> <p>freq_months (e.g. freq_2019-04): the average frequency of the term</p> <p>coef: the regression coefficient</p> <p>coef_norm: the regression coefficient divided by the mean frequency of the keyword</p> <p>coef_norm_max: the regression coefficient divided by the maximum frequency of the keyword</p>
Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis (01.2016-04.2019)
<p>Sentiment analysis of tech media articles using VADER package and co-occurrence analysis</p> <p><strong>Sources with weights:</strong></p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p><strong>Methodology</strong></p> <p>The sentiment analysis has been prepared using VADER*, an open-source lexicon and rule-based sentiment analysis tool. VADER is specifically designed for social media analysis, but can be also applied for other text sources. The sentiment lexicon was compiled using various sources (other sentiment data sets, Twitter etc.) and was validated by human input. The advantage of VADER is that the rule-based engine includes word-order sensitive relations and degree modifiers.</p> <p>As VADER is more robust in the case of shorter social media texts, the analysed articles have been divided into paragraphs. The analysis have been carried out for the social issues presented in the co-occurrence exercise.</p> <p>The process included the following main steps:</p> <ul> <li>The 100 most frequently co-occurring terms are identified for every social issue (using the co-occurrence methodology)</li> <li>The articles containing the given social issue and co-occurring term are identified</li> <li>The identified articles are divided into paragraphs</li> <li>Social issue and co-occurring words are removed from the paragraph</li> <li>The VADER sentiment analysis is carried out for every identified and modified paragraph</li> <li>The average for the given word pair is calculated for the final result</li> </ul> <p>Therefore, the procedure has been repeated for 100 words for all identified social issues.</p> <p>The sentiment analysis resulted in a compound score for every paragraph. The score is calculated from the sum of the valence scores of each word in the paragraph, and normalised between the values -1 (most extreme negative) and +1 (most extreme positive). Finally, the average is calculated from the paragraph results. Removal of terms is meant to exclude sentiment of the co-occurring word itself, because the word may be misleading, e.g. when some technologies or companies attempt to solve a negative issue. The neighbourhood's scores would be positive, but the negative term would bring the paragraph's score down.</p> <p>The presented tables include the most extreme co-occurring terms for the analysed social issue. The examples are chosen from the list of words with 30 most positive and 30 most negative sentiment. The presented graphs show the evolution of sentiments for social issues. The analysed paragraphs are selected the following way:</p> <ul> <li>The articles containing the given social issue are identified</li> <li>The paragraphs containing the social issue are selected for sentiment analysis</li> </ul> <p>*Hutto, C.J. & Gilbert, E.E. (2014). VADER: A Parsimonious Rule-based Model for Sentiment Analysis of Social Media Text. Eighth International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media (ICWSM-14). Ann Arbor, MI, June 2014.</p>
Co-occurrences of trending keywords in popular tech media (01.2016-12.2019)
<p>Sources with weights</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Exploring the relationship between topics</li> <li>Pairs of terms which are mentioned together in media articles</li> <li>Most trending social issues and technologies have been selected (e.g. 'gdpr', '5G')</li> <li>The co-occurrence analysis is calculated for pairs consisting of emerging social issues and trending uni/bigrams</li> <li>The number of times the terms appear in articles together with a social issue is divided by the number of times the social issue is mentioned across all articles</li> <li>A single index is constructed for all word pairs by weighted average (taking into account the prevalence of the given source)</li> </ul>
Keyword frequencies in popular tech media (01.2016-12.2019)
<p>Sources with weights</p> <ul> <li>Euractiv 5%</li> <li>The Conversation 5%</li> <li>Politico Europe 5 %</li> <li>IEEE Spectrum 5 %</li> <li>Techforge 5%</li> <li>Fastcompany 5%</li> <li>The Guardian (Tech) 12%</li> <li>Arstechnica 5%</li> <li>Reuters 5%</li> <li>Gizmodo 9%</li> <li>ZDNet 9%</li> <li>The Register 12%</li> <li>The Verge 9%</li> <li>TechCrunch 9%</li> </ul> <p>Methodology</p> <ul> <li>Frequency of appearances for all unigrams and bigrams in the texts</li> <li>Frequency: number of appearances of every term divided by the number of all terms (for every month and source) </li> <li>Several media sources: a representative index is calculated with weighted average (weights as above)</li> <li>Average monthly change in the analised term's frequency is calculated by OLS regressions</li> <li>The dependent variable of the estimation is the frequency index, while the number of months since the beginning of the analysed period (January 2016) is the independent variable</li> <li>The regression coefficient (referred to as coef) shows by how much on average the analysed expression’s frequency changed with every observed month (marginal change of the frequency), revealing which keywords had the biggest monthly growth</li> </ul> <p>Columns</p> <p>freq_months (e.g. freq_2019-04): the average frequency of the term</p> <p>coef: the regression coefficient</p> <p>coef_norm: the regression coefficient divided by the mean frequency of the keyword</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>
Digital Parenting Education: Impact on Mothers' Social Media Use and Children's Tech Attitudes
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT07008651. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 7.
Sample data for tech savvy digital media
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.