<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Twitter &#8211; how interconnected are you?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sclater.com/blog/?feed=rss2&#038;p=123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123</link>
	<description>Reflections on virtual learning</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 18:33:58 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: niall</title>
		<link>http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123&#038;cpage=1#comment-3282</link>
		<dc:creator>niall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:44:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123#comment-3282</guid>
		<description>Tony, sorry I kept you awake all night - but I blame you for me not being able to get to sleep till 2am in the first place.

Emma, I don&#039;t see that it would make any difference to do this analysis over Twitter as a whole or over just a sub group (as Tony&#039;s been trying to do with Open University staff).  In fact it would be interesting to see to what extent people who are well connected in an institution are also well connected across Twitter as a whole.

Here&#039;s a quick attempt at the formula:

[twit value] = Average tweets per day of a person; n = number of people following you (followers) or followed by you (followed)

so the simple version is:

[twitter interconnectedness] = [your twit value] * ([twit value of follower 1] + ... [twit value of follower n] + [twit value of followed 1] + ... [twit value of followed n])

Taking into account @tweets it becomes:

[twitter interconnectedness] = [your twit value] * ([twit value of follower 1] + ... [twit value of follower n] + [twit value of followed 1] + ... [twit value of followed n]) + [your twit value] * 5 * ([@tweets sent by you to @tweet receiver 1] * [twit value of named @tweet receiver 1] + ... [@tweets sent by you to passive receiver n] * [twit value of named @tweet receiver n]) + [your twit value] * 2 ([twit value of passive @tweet receiver 1] + ... [twit value of passive @tweet receiver n]) + [your twit value] * 5 * ([@tweets sent to you by @tweet sender 1] * [twit value of @tweet sender 1] + ... [@tweets sent to you by @tweet sender n] * [twit value of @tweet sender n]) + [your twit value] * 2 ([twit value of passive @tweet sender 1] + ... [twit value of passive @tweet sender n])

I didn&#039;t take into account the final factor and I haven&#039;t checked this properly.  But you did ask and I bet you wish you&#039;d hadn&#039;t now...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Tony, sorry I kept you awake all night &#8211; but I blame you for me not being able to get to sleep till 2am in the first place.</p>
<p>Emma, I don&#8217;t see that it would make any difference to do this analysis over Twitter as a whole or over just a sub group (as Tony&#8217;s been trying to do with Open University staff).  In fact it would be interesting to see to what extent people who are well connected in an institution are also well connected across Twitter as a whole.</p>
<p>Here&#8217;s a quick attempt at the formula:</p>
<p>[twit value] = Average tweets per day of a person; n = number of people following you (followers) or followed by you (followed)</p>
<p>so the simple version is:</p>
<p>[twitter interconnectedness] = [your twit value] * ([twit value of follower 1] + &#8230; [twit value of follower n] + [twit value of followed 1] + &#8230; [twit value of followed n])</p>
<p>Taking into account @tweets it becomes:</p>
<p>[twitter interconnectedness] = [your twit value] * ([twit value of follower 1] + &#8230; [twit value of follower n] + [twit value of followed 1] + &#8230; [twit value of followed n]) + [your twit value] * 5 * ([@tweets sent by you to @tweet receiver 1] * [twit value of named @tweet receiver 1] + &#8230; [@tweets sent by you to passive receiver n] * [twit value of named @tweet receiver n]) + [your twit value] * 2 ([twit value of passive @tweet receiver 1] + &#8230; [twit value of passive @tweet receiver n]) + [your twit value] * 5 * ([@tweets sent to you by @tweet sender 1] * [twit value of @tweet sender 1] + &#8230; [@tweets sent to you by @tweet sender n] * [twit value of @tweet sender n]) + [your twit value] * 2 ([twit value of passive @tweet sender 1] + &#8230; [twit value of passive @tweet sender n])</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t take into account the final factor and I haven&#8217;t checked this properly.  But you did ask and I bet you wish you&#8217;d hadn&#8217;t now&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Emma</title>
		<link>http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123&#038;cpage=1#comment-3271</link>
		<dc:creator>Emma</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:13:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123#comment-3271</guid>
		<description>So when are you going to write the formula to work all of that out ... 

And, does it make a difference, if you &amp; your group of twitterers are a closed group &amp; none of you have any other followers/ are following anyone out side the group. ...

Emma</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So when are you going to write the formula to work all of that out &#8230; </p>
<p>And, does it make a difference, if you &amp; your group of twitterers are a closed group &amp; none of you have any other followers/ are following anyone out side the group. &#8230;</p>
<p>Emma</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Visualising the OU Twitter Network &#171; OUseful.Info, the blog&#8230;</title>
		<link>http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123&#038;cpage=1#comment-3270</link>
		<dc:creator>Visualising the OU Twitter Network &#171; OUseful.Info, the blog&#8230;</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:45:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sclater.com/blog/?p=123#comment-3270</guid>
		<description>[...] As to why am I picking on Niall&#8230;? Well, apart from making the point that by engaging in &#8216;public&#8217; social networks, other people can look at what you&#8217;re doing, it&#8217;s partly because thinking about this post on &#8216;Twitter impact factors&#8217; kept me up all night: Twitter - how interconnected are you?. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] As to why am I picking on Niall&#8230;? Well, apart from making the point that by engaging in &#8216;public&#8217; social networks, other people can look at what you&#8217;re doing, it&#8217;s partly because thinking about this post on &#8216;Twitter impact factors&#8217; kept me up all night: Twitter &#8211; how interconnected are you?. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
