2,337
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Researching heritage values in social media environments: understanding variabilities and (in)visibilities

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, & ORCID Icon
Pages 1021-1040 | Received 10 Mar 2023, Accepted 28 Jun 2023, Published online: 06 Jul 2023

References

  • Adamson, A., L. Kilpatrick, and M. McDonald. 2016. Pints, Politics and Piety: The Architecture and Industries of Canongate. Edinburgh: Historic Environment Scotland. Edinburgh [ online] (Accessed Jan 29 2022). http://canmore-pdf.rcahms.gov.uk/wp/00/WP004359.pdf.
  • Arrigoni, G., and A. Galani. 2019. “From Place-Memories to Active Citizenship: The Potential of Geotagged User-Generated Content for Memory Scholarship.” In Doing Memory Research, edited by D. Drozdzewski and C. Birdsall, 145–168. Singapore: Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1411-7_8.
  • Atske, S. August 10 2022. “Teens Social Media and Technology.” In Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech [Blog] (Accessed March 07 2023). https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2022/08/10/teens-social-media-and-technology-2022/.
  • Barrie, C., and J. C. Ho. 2021. “AcademictwitteR: An R Package to Access the Twitter Academic Research Product Track V2 API Endpoint.” Journal of Open Source Software 6 (62): 3272. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.03272.
  • Bennett, T., F. Cameron, N. Dias, B. Dibley, R. Harrison, I. Jacknis, and C. McCarthy. 2017. Collecting, Ordering, Governing: Anthropology, Museums, and Liberal Government. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780822373605.
  • Blank, G., and C. Lutz. 2017. “Representativeness of Social Media in Great Britain: Investigating Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Pinterest, Google+, and Instagram.” American Behavioral Scientist 61 (7): 741–756. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217717559.
  • Bonacchi, C. 2021. “Heritage Transformations.” Big Data & Society 8 (2): 205395172110343. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211034302.
  • Bonacchi, C. 2022. Heritage and Nationalism: Understanding Populism Through Big Data. London: UCL Press.
  • Bossetta, M. 2018. “The Digital Architectures of Social Media: Comparing Political Campaigning on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat in the 2016 U.S. Election.” Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95 (2): 471–496. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018763307.
  • Bradley-Lovekin, T., M. Roy, and D. Sproat. 2019. Old Tolbooth Wynd 179a Canongate, Edinburgh, Archaeology and Historic Building Assessment, Unpublished AOC Archaeological report.
  • Brown, S., J. Davidovic, and A. Hasan. 2021. “The Algorithm Audit: Scoring the Algorithms That Score Us.” Big Data & Society 8 (1): 205395172098386. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720983865.
  • Bucher, T., and A. Helmond. 2018. “The Affordances of Social Media Platforms.” In The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, edited by J. Burgess, A. Marwick, and T. Poell, 233–253. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473984066.n14.
  • Cameron, F. R. 2021. The Future of Digital Data, Heritage and Curation: In a More-Than-Human World. London: Routledge.
  • Cammaerts, B. 2015. “Technologies of Self-Mediation: Affordances and Constraints of Social Media for Protest Movements.” In Civic Engagement and Social Media: Political Participation Beyond Protest, edited by J. Uldam and A. Vestergaard, 87–110. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137434166_5.
  • Costa, E. 2018. “Affordances-In-Practice: An Ethnographic Critique of Social Media Logic and Context Collapse.” New Media & Society 20 (10): 3641–3656. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818756290.
  • Deep Cities. 2020. “Deep Cities” [online] (Accessed Feb 1). https://curbatheri.niku.no/.
  • Dennison, E. P. 2008. “The Medieval Burgh of Canongate .” In Scotland’s Parliament Site and the Canongate: Archaeology and History, edited by the Holyrood Archaeology Project Team, 59–68. Edinburgh: Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.
  • DeSilvey, C. 2017. Curated Decay: Heritage Beyond Saving. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  • D’Ignazio, C., and L. F. Klein. 2020. Data Feminism. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
  • Draude, C., G. Hornung, and G. Klumbytė. 2022. “Mapping Data Justice as a Multidimensional Concept Through Feminist and Legal Perspectives.” In New Perspectives in Critical Data Studies: The Ambivalences of Data Power, edited by A. Hepp, J. Jarke, and L. Kramp, 187–216. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-96180-0_9.
  • Ekelund, R. 2022. “Fascination, Nostalgia, and Knowledge Desire in Digital Memory Culture: Emotions and Mood Work in Retrospective Facebook Groups.” Memory Studies 15 (5): 1248–1262. https://doi.org/10.1177/17506980221094517.
  • Ellison, N. B., and J. Vitak. 2015. “Social Network Site Affordances and Their Relationship to Social Capital Processes.” In The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology, edited by S. Sundar, 203–227. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118426456.ch9.
  • Elsinghorst, S. 2017. “Characterizing Twitter Followers with Tidytext” [online] (Accessed Feb 16 2023). https://shiring.github.io/text_analysis/2017/06/28/twitter_post.
  • Fox, N., T. August, F. Mancini, K. E. Parks, F. Eigenbrod, J. M. Bullock, L. Sutter, and L. J. Graham. 2020. ““Photosearcher” Package in R: An Accessible and Reproducible Method for Harvesting Large Datasets from Flickr.” SoftwareX 12:100624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.softx.2020.100624.
  • Fricker, M. 2009. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Geismar, H. 2017. “Instant Archives?” In Routledge Companion to Digital Ethnography, edited by L. Hjorth, H. Horst, A. Galloway, and G. Bell, 331–343. New York, NY and Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Gibson, J. J. 1979. “The Theory of Affordances.” In Perceiving, Acting, and Knowing: Toward an Ecological Psychology, edited by R. Shaw and J. Bransford, 67–82. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Gregory, J. 2015. “Connecting with the Past Through Social Media: The ‘Beautiful Buildings and Cool Places Perth Has Lost’ Facebook Group.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 21 (1): 22–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2014.884015.
  • Gregory, J., and S. Chambers. 2021. “Longing for the Past: Lost Cities on Social Media.” In People-Centred Methodologies for Heritage Conservation: Exploring Emotional Attachments to Historic Urban Places, edited by R. Madgin and J. Lesh, 41–64. London: Routledge.
  • Hargittai, E. 2020. “Potential Biases in Big Data: Omitted Voices on Social Media.” Social Science Computer Review 38 (1): 10–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439318788322.
  • Harrison, R. 2013. Heritage: Critical Approaches. Abingdon: Routledge.
  • Harrison, R., C. DeSilvey, C. Holtorf, S. Macdonald, N. Bartolini, E. Breithoff, H. Fredheim, A. Lyons, S. May, J. Morgan, and S. Penrose. 2020. Heritage Futures: Comparative Approaches to Natural and Cultural Heritage Practices. London: UCL Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv13xps9m.
  • Harvard University. 2023. “Social Science One” [online] (Accessed Aug 14 2023). https://socialscience.one/.
  • Hornstein, S. 2016. Losing Site: Architecture, Memory and Place. London: Routledge.
  • Jones, S. 2017. “Wrestling with the Social Value of Heritage: Problems, Dilemmas and Opportunities.” Journal of Community Archaeology & Heritage 4 (1): 21–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/20518196.2016.1193996.
  • Jones, S., C. Bonacchi, E. Robson, E. Broccoli, A. Hiscock, A. Biondi, M. Nucciotti, T. S. Guttormsen, K. Fouseki, and M. Díaz-Andreu. Forthcoming. “Assessing the Dynamic Social Values of the ‘Deep City’: An Integrated Methodology Combining Online and Offline Approaches.”
  • Jones, S., and T. Yarrow. 2022. The Object of Conservation: An Ethnography of Heritage Practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
  • Jung, E. H., and S. S. Sundar. 2018. “Status Update: Gratifications Derived from Facebook Affordances by Older Adults.” New Media & Society 20 (11): 4135–4154. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818768090.
  • Kennedy, L., M. Naaaman, S. Ahern, R. Nair, and T. Ratternbury 2007. “How Flickr Helps Us Make Sense of the World: Context and Content in Community-Contributed Media Collections”. In MM ‘07: Proceedings of the 15thInternational Conference on Multimedia 2007, Augsburg, Germany, September 24-29, 2007, edited by A. Hanjalic, S. Choi, B. Bailey, and N. Sebe, pp. 631–640. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/1291233.1291384.
  • Knoblauch, H. 2005. “Focused Ethnography”. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research 6 (3): Art. 44. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-6.3.20.
  • Leonelli, S., R. Lovell, B. W. Wheeler, L. Fleming, and H. Williams. 2021. “From FAIR Data to Fair Data Use: Methodological Data Fairness in Health-Related Social Media Research.” Big Data & Society 8 (1): 205395172110103. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211010310.
  • Liu, B. 2022. Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-02145-9.
  • Lupton, D., C. Southerton, M. Clark, and A. Watson. 2021. The Face Mask in COVID Times: A Sociomaterial Analysis. Berlin: De Gruyter.
  • Macdonald, S. 2009a. Difficult Heritage: Negotiating the Nazi Past in Nuremberg and Beyond. London: Routledge.
  • Macdonald, S. 2009b. “Reassembling Nuremberg, Reassembling Heritage.” Journal of Cultural Economy 2 (1–2): 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/17530350903064121.
  • McLaren, D., M. Roy, D. Wilson, D. Gallagher, G. R. Haggarty, A. Morrison, J. Robertson, et al. 2022. “The New Street Gasworks, Caltongate: Archaeological Investigation of a Major Power Production Complex in the Heart of Edinburgh and Its Significance in the Industrial Development of Britain.” Scottish Archaeological Internet Reports 101. https://doi.org/10.9750/issn.2056-7421.2022.101.
  • Mol, A. 2002. The Body Multiple: Ontology in Medical Practice. London: Duke University Press.
  • Morstatter, F. 2016. “Detecting and Mitigating Bias in Social Media”. 2016 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM), San Francisco, CA, USA, edited by R. Kumar, J. Caverlee, and H. Tong, pp. 1347–1348. San Francisco, CA, USA IEEE Press. https://do.org/10.1109/ASONAM.2016.7752412.
  • Pink, S. 2022. “Methods for Researching Automated Futures.” Qualitative Inquiry 28 (7): 747–753. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778004221096845.
  • Queensberry. 2018. “New Waverley, Edinburgh” [online] (Accessed Jan 31 2023). https://www.queensberryproperties.co.uk/projects/new-waverley/.
  • Rathnayake, C., and D. D. Suthers. 2018. “Twitter Issue Response Hashtags as Affordances for Momentary Connectedness.” Social Media + Society 4 (3): 2056305118784780. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305118784780.
  • (RSEMA). 1830. Report of the Society for the Support of the Edinburgh Magdalene Asylum for 1827, 1828 & 1829. 1830. Printed by J. Ritchie, Edinburgh.
  • Saif, M. M. 2021. “Sentiment Analysis: Automatically Detecting Valence, Emotions, and Other Affectual States from Text.” arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2005.11882.
  • Scottish Government. 2020. “Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2020” [online] (Accessed Nov 09 2021). https://simd.scot/.
  • Silge, J., and D. Robinson. 2016. “Tidytext: Text Mining and Analysis Using Tidy Data Principles in R.” The Journal of Open Source Software 1 (3): 37. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.00037.
  • Silge, J., and D. Robinson. 2017. Text Mining with R: A Tidy Approach. Sebastapol, CA: O‘Reilly Media.
  • Sontag, S. 2008. On Photography. London: Penguin.
  • Sterling, C. 2020. “Critical Heritage and the Posthumanities: Problems and Prospects.” International Journal of Heritage Studies 26 (11): 1029–1046. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2020.1715464.
  • Taylor, L. 2017. “What is Data Justice? The Case for Connecting Digital Rights and Freedoms Globally.” Big Data & Society 4 (2): 2053951717736335. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951717736335.
  • Thompson, T. L. 2020. “Data-Bodies and Data Activism: Presencing Women in Digital Heritage Research.” Big Data & Society 7 (2): 205395172096561. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720965613.