Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Social Media Quick Scan Presentation

Annelies Brands
Colloquium
Rijksuniverseit Groningen

  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

Social Media Quick Scan Presentation

  1. 1. DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTERACTIVE VISUALIZATION TOOL FOR SOCIAL MEDIA INFORMATION IN SUPPORT OF TACTICAL CRIME ANALYSIS FINAL-YEAR RESEARCH PROJECT ANNELIES BRANDS Towards a Social Media Quick Scan
  2. 2. Contents  Introduction  Background  Method  Identification of needs & establishment of requirements  Design  Evaluation  Discussion
  3. 3. Introduction
  4. 4. Introduction
  5. 5. Introduction
  6. 6. The problem
  7. 7. Information overload  Too much (complex) information (1)  Limited response time (2)  Limited processing capacity (3)
  8. 8. Research questions  How can visualization of social media information support detectives in their work?  How can the results of a quick scan of social media information best be visualized?  How can objective reasoning be supported in the visualization? (tunnel vision prevented)  Following from the previous question: How can the relevance and reliability of User-Generated Content be validated?  How can the visualization(s) be accessible for people with different technical expertise levels?
  9. 9. Background: Social media in police investigations  8 W-questions:  Who, what, where, when, whith what, why, in which way, why can we say this?  Objective reasoning  From data to intelligence  Reliability checks: 1. Provenance: Is this the original piece of content? 2. Source: Who uploaded the content? 3. Date: When was the content created? 4. Location: Where was the content created?
  10. 10. Background: Visualization Visualization pipeline
  11. 11. “Overview, zoom & filter, details on demand”
  12. 12. Recall Development of an interactive visualization tool for social media information in support of tactical crime analysis
  13. 13. Method – Interaction Design
  14. 14. Method  Identify needs & requirements  11 interviews (2 female) with:  RTIC employees  Detectives  Social media investigation experts  Developing alternative designs  Mock-ups  Building interactive versions  Build interactive prototype of one case (one type of crime)  Evaluation  9 interviews (male) with the same police employees  Semi-structured  List of statements
  15. 15. Insight goals  Find factual information on persons  Look into the network of friends  Insight in the online impact of a crime  Create a visual overview of the environment of the crime scene  Show the source and context of the information  View data in a timeline  Select and export relevant information
  16. 16. Establishment of requirements  Quickly access data from multiple sources  Connect data from multiple sources  Collaborate and share relevant information with colleagues  Interact with the data
  17. 17. Use case diagram
  18. 18. Design: characteristics  Web-based  Pinboard  Combining data from multiple sources
  19. 19. Design: prototype  HTML+CSS+Javascript  Including several libraries for the visualizations  Data  Twitter dataset from Jong&Dückers(2016)  Manually collected data  Design priorities:  Focus on overview, calmness and usability  Embed the data when possible  Always show the source and link to the original content
  20. 20. Case: Tarik
  21. 21. Design: prototype  Zie jpgs
  22. 22. Design: prototype
  23. 23. Design: prototype
  24. 24. Design: prototype
  25. 25. Evaluation – interview results  “Clean”, “overview”, “easy”  Positive points:  Panels with overview of the sources and the golden Ws  Pin to board and export  Maps  List of friend suggestions  Unclear:  ‘Added data’-panel  How to add data from other sources?  Search in table  Filter buttons on Twitter page
  26. 26. Evaluation – interview results  Missing:  Twitter search queries  Filter on retweets  How to work with multiple cases  Suggestions:  Move the chat-panel to a pop-up  Filter buttons for witness terms  Sort the data on number of comments
  27. 27. Evaluation – Statements on insight goals
  28. 28. Evaluation - Usability  Mean SUS score of 80,1  (>68 is above average, 100 max)
  29. 29. Discussion 1/2  The chosen visualizations suit the insight goals  Focus on source and context information  Applicable for users with different expertise levels  Challenges for future development  Further implementation  Add data real-time?
  30. 30. Discussion 2/2  This project adds to research on developing visualization software  That can integrate multiple sources  And is accessible to users with different technical backgrounds, especially non-programmers  This project added to the knowledge on information overload in the police domain, the use of social media in police investigations and what technology is needed to support this.
  31. 31. Conclusion  The first big steps towards a Social Media Quick Scan  Great potential for supporting detectives in their work  Use social media information earlier on in police investigations
  32. 32. Promofilmpje  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vn9uOuqW8L 8

×