Social analytics @ google

Social Analytics @ Google
David Huffaker, Ed H. Chi

西班牙人
他是台灣人
Google Plus Tech Team Leader

Google Confidential and Proprietary

Two Ways of Studying Social Networks

(1) Large scale techniques such as SNA help with
understanding broad regularities.

• 
Network science and surprising regularities on how users behave
in social systems.

•  us understand what statistical models and techniques to use
Help
to describe broad user behavior.

兩個研讀Social Networks的方向

1.研究SNA可以找出網路使用者的常有的使用習慣


Two Ways of Studying Social Networks

(2) Networks form from millions of user interactions.

• 
Understanding user interactions at the micro-level helps understand
why social relationships form.

o From perception to cognition to decision making
o Perception of social information
o Representation of self to others
o Decision making under social proof and peer pressure

兩個研讀Social Networks的方向

2.做Micro-level的研究，意即網路使用者微觀的使用研究，了解社
群網路的形成

微觀研究: 網路使用者如何感知網頁上的資訊，如何做出決定等等
細微的使用者行為 Google Confidential and Proprietary

Edward Hall's Proxemics

http://simonwinters02.blogspot.com/2009/11/
這個研究顯示個人的社交行為會呈現分群的概念，
edward-t-hall-theory-of-proxemics-and.html

Google以這個model開發Google Plus的功能”Social Circles”

How relationship form and what they mean...

所以Google就開發了新的Share方式，以Circle的概念分群Sharing
產品就是現在的Google Plus

Selective Sharing in G+
Research Questions
How are users utilizing Circles to organize their social networks?
What motivates users to share content?
What decisions do users make about audience choices? 這是他們做的研究假設
與方法

他們找Users來做
interview來驗證他們的
Methodology 假設

User logs 就跟UX 還有Lean
100,000 randomly sampled active users over 7 days Startup建議的研究方法
Top 1,000 Circle names 一樣，找使用者實地測
Survey (N = 168) 試然後改進產品。
Active users on G+ (recruitment posted G+); 56% response rate.
Interviews (N = 12)

Talking in Circles: Selective Sharing in Google+.
Sanjay Kairam, Michael J. Brzozowski, David Huffaker, Ed H. Chi. In Proc. of CHI'2012.

Three-quarters of users engaged in selective sharing.
% Users % Items
測試結果有74.8%的
Public 33.9% 33.8%
人會使用Circles來做
分享的，符吅前面 Circles 74.8% 67.6%
看到的Circle model
Individuals 10.3% 5.8%
社交分群的概念

Popular circle names center on life facets or tie strength.
右表是統計Users的
Circles熱門分群。 Work School Strong Weak Other

User在Top10 Circles Top 10 74.1% 13.8% 7.2% 0.0% 4.9%
命名裡面有74.1%是
Top 100 47.5% 16.0% 9.0% 3.5% 24.0%
關於工作，例如同
事圈，強關係圈(家 Top 1000 31.4% 12.6% 8.8% 4.0% 43.1%
人)，弱關係圈(網
友)
Talking in Circles: Selective Sharing in Google+. Sanjay Kairam, Michael J. Brzozowski, David Huffaker,
Ed H. Chi. In Proc. of CHI'2012.

church
music
google
這些名詞是熱門的Circle
name。 tech
Church ，西方人信基度教
的人很多，所以會有 twitter
Church的社交圈

tech，科技圈的朋友或事
photographer
知名的科技部落客等等
s
Photographer是喜愛的攝
影師等等 celebrities
news

relatives

Why do people share?
Inherent value of content (60%) Inherent value of content(60%) :User
Content is deemed useful, cool, funny, 會想分享有價值的content，例如好
interesting 笑的照片或有趣的內容等等有價資
訊
Desire to share about oneself (26%)
Expressing an inherent desire to relate Desire to share about oneself(26%):
one’s personal experiences and opinions User會想分享跟自己有關的事，例
to others; from brief updates to long posts 如想告訴朋友自己登上聖母峰之類
with emotional content 的事

Discourse (17%) Discourse(17%): User想參與他人的對
Desire to start or participate in a 話時也會分享。
conversation (e.g., current events);
Soliciting help or information from others Evangelism(7%):User會想告訴某些人
依些特別的資訊，例如想告訴別人
Evangelism (7%) 他的朋友正在為了癌症病童參加馬
Intention to spread information about 拉松活動，有沒有人可以贊助他朋
specific events or work being conducted 友這種訊息。
by others

How do they select an audience?
Privacy (22%)
Focused on risks to self over others;
breakdown of users who are "public by User 是怎麼選擇分享的audiences?
default" and "private by default"
1.依照隱私選擇分享(22%):有些隱私
Relevance (23%) 話題只會在某些私密的圈圈裡面分
Targeting content to those who think it 享
might be interested (e.g., a joke that only
your college buddies get; pics from family 2.相關度(23%):例如有些笑話是只有
vacation); want to avoid spam or polluting 特定人士才懂，例如大學同學才懂
others' streams 的笑話，User會把資訊分享給與資
訊相關度高的人
Distribution (43%)
Maximize the potential audience; expand 3.分配程度:User為了獲取更多的聽
their own audiences 眾，所以他們會選擇分享給特定族
群。


Users
make use of circles
to manage context of
sharing different pieces of content.
所以Google的研究結論是，User會用Circles管理自己的資訊分享對象

Social Media Holy Trinity:
Content, Audience, Context
Google 兩位講者說Social Network的Holy Trinity 神聖三位一體是內容，聽眾、情境。

研究內容(Content or Infomation)是怎麼在社群網路裡面流轉，TA聽眾是誰，聽眾們

的情境是什麼。

"Social" is a layer across all of Google.

Social是橫跨所
有Google(產品)
的層面


前面的投影片是Google這次主題的第一個研究”Google Social Circles”，接下來的主
題是 Social Search (User可以搜尋到其他User在網路上留下的資訊)

Google要研究user是怎麼去perceiving social annotation，Social Search的結果如下，
以下是各部份的名詞解釋。

Topic
URL

Snippet

Avatar icon Social Annotation社交註釋節錄
像Google + 你可以看到你的朋友按了+1的
大頭貼按紐，那就是annotation

Social Annotations in Web Search. In Proc. CHI2012. May 5, 2012. Austin,Google Confidential and Proprietary
TX, USA.
Muralidharan, Zoltan Gyongyi, Ed H. Chi.

Study #1 - Tasks
•  Organic search tasks with Half "social"
18-20
o  Designed to bring up real annotations (via impersonation tool)

•  spanned 6-8 topics
Tasks
o  local services/restaurants 然後他們也是找了一堆User來
o  products 做研究，他們安排了很多task
o  how to's 讓使用者操作，這個研究有
o  fact-finding 用眼動儀
o  navigation
o  (news, entertainment) not all participants

• Examples:
o  (local) "Find a good French restaurant in Palo Alto"?
o  (how-to) "How do you make a box kite"?


這是Google的實驗要驗
證假設，使用者看到社
Possible Factors:
群搜尋的結果後，會因
為哪些因素點擊進去看， 1.  Contact closeness
他們假設了引起USER點
擊的三個相關因素 2.  Contact expertise
1.跟社交的親密度有關
2.跟專業度有關
3. Search intent
3.跟搜尋的意圖有關

Which matters most?


Study #1 - Results: Surprise!

Generally, subjects didn't notice the annotations!
Only 11% were noticed!
實驗結果讓他們大吃一
驚，原來只有11%的人
有注意到Social
annotation，所以他們
又多了一個新的問題要
解決，為什麼這麼少人
注意到Social Annotation


Study #2: Design Variations
Position: 1st or 2nd

Placement Snippet Length

Below snippet 4 lines
(default)

Above snippet 2 lines

Big picture
1 line

所以他們調整了Social Search result 的UI設計，改變annotation的擺 Google Confidential and Proprietary

放位置或是節錄(snippet)的行數，然後去做實驗驗證。

Study #2 - Results: Annotation
Placement

實驗顯示，annotation放在snippet上方會比較受到注意力，這張表
Y軸是User眼睛注意力停留在網頁上的時間數值。 Google Confidential and Proprietary

Study #2 - Results: Snippet Length

linear regression:
2-line: (b = -0.51, t(203) = -1.85, p < 0.07)
4-line: (b = -0.74, t(203) = -2.56, p < 0.01)
實驗顯示，snippet越長，受到的注意力越高，但是Annotation受到
的注意力就會越少，反過來說，snippet越短，Annotation受到的注
意力就越高，兩者存在一種競爭關係。 Google Confidential and Proprietary

Study #2 - Results: Snippet Length
Snippet Length: 1 line, 2 lines, or 4 lines

這是眼動儀研究展示，圖中的亮區表是眼球注意力集中的區域

Annotation Perception Summary

•  Subjects always pay attention to URLs and titles
•  If not enough to make decision, they look to see if
the snippet offers reasons to click thru
§  Annotation competes for attention in context
of placement, snippet length, & avatar icons
結論
1.Use總會把注意力放在Topics 與 URL上面

2.如果Topics與URL提供的資訊不夠讓User做出決定，那user會去看
snippet的內容，看看內容是否提供足夠的理由讓User點擊進去看。
第二點的次結論是Annotation能獲得的注意力與context的擺放位置， Google Confidential and Proprietary

snippet的長度與avatar icons的大小有競爭關係。

Social Annotations in Search
Research Questions Social Search的第二個研究
，Google想知道以下問題~
Do some contacts affect user choice of search results more than
others? 1.社交關係的強弱會不會左右
User選擇使用search results
Are annotations relevant across various information needs (i.e.,
different queries)?
2.Annotations 與各種不同資訊
搜尋之間有沒有相關
Methodology
Survey (N = 286) Google 在這次研究中請受
Five closest contacts ("Close-Contacts") 訪者做兩件事
Provide a list of who you discuss entertainment, news, computer
advice ("Domain-Contacts")
1.列出五個跟他關係最親
Experimental Design (N = 269) 近的名單
Mock results showing mix of close and domain contacts
2.列出一張名單，名單上
Lots of randomization to account for ordering effects
是你想跟他討論某些領域
(domain)資訊的人
Around the Water Cooler: Shared Discussion Topics and Contact Closeness in Social Search.
Saranga Komanduri, Lujun Fang, David Huffaker, Jessica Staddon, J. (2012): In Proc. of ICWSM 2012.

We find a strong preference for domain-contact
annotations on most search queries.

"Harry Potter Movies" was
strong enough to override
the top-ranked search result
bias.

"How to use Twitter" also
shows large differences.

Who do you go to for
technical advice?

研究結果發現，User在Search queries是比較偏好相信domain-contact annotations的，親密關
係的強弱反而比較次要。例如講到使用 Twitter，User會選擇相信科技圈的朋友而不是自己
的父母

The preference for domain contacts holds across
information needs and domains.

最上面那張表是Social Search的Query條件、User想得到的資訊需求種類，還有找到的知識領 Google Confidential and Proprietary
域的歸納結果舉例。

Not all ties are created equal.
在這個研究中，Google發現人跟人之間產生的強弱關係不一定會相等

意思大概是兩個人建立關係的時候，A認為他跟B是強關係，但B認為A跟
他是弱關係，這種稱為關係的不相等


兩位講者就在這張投影片做結論，後面比較沒重點的投影片就沒多說了

What is the the value of multi-
method research?

Use analytics to discover general user behavior.

Understanding "why" and intent.
Triangulate evidence around a problem.
結論:做SNA的兩個重點

1.透過Social Network 的研究去歸納出大眾使用者的使用習慣
2.除了一般使用習慣以外，還要研究社群網路裡面微觀的使用者使用習慣。


"Focus on the user and all else will follow."


"The goal of research at Google is to
bring significant, practical benefits to
our users, and to do so rapidly..."


Blurry lines between research and
development.

Researchers embedded on product teams;
work closely with engineers and designers.

Iterative and usually involves writing near-
production code from day one.

Leverage cloud infrastructure to deploy
experiments to mass user base, or rapidly
deploy a prototype at scale.

Social analytics @ google

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Destacado

Destacado (19)

Similar a Social analytics @ google

Similar a Social analytics @ google (20)

Social analytics @ google