Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 1 minor 61 references

Online participation on Bluesky is structured by low-vocality practices like liking rather than by posting alone.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-06-26 12:16 UTC pith:7YPYULVF

load-bearing objection The paper uses a large Bluesky dataset to separate engagement intensity from style and shows liking dominates high-intensity use while posting is more common at low intensity. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2606.21665 v1 pith:7YPYULVF submitted 2026-06-19 cs.SI cs.CYcs.HC

Low-Vocality Engagement Shapes Online Participation

Veronica Mesina , Andrea Failla , Luca Pappalardo , Giulio Rossetti This is my paper
classification cs.SI cs.CYcs.HC
keywords online participationlow-vocality engagementBlueskyuser intensityengagement stylesocial media analyticsplatform presenceactivity transitions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The authors reconstruct participation profiles from over three billion activity records covering more than 80 percent of registered Bluesky users. They separate monthly user behavior into an intensity dimension that measures how much engagement occurs and a style dimension that captures how it is expressed through different actions. Vocal posting turns out to be highly concentrated while high-intensity users tend to favor liking over posting, and low-intensity users show the reverse pattern. Transition data indicate that high-intensity likers and posters act as attractors within the active space and that inactivity forms a selective barrier to re-entry. The work therefore argues that platform presence must be tracked dynamically rather than through visible posts alone.

Core claim

By aggregating three billion records into monthly user-level observations and separating intensity from style, the study establishes that vocal production is highly concentrated, high-intensity engagement associates most strongly with liking, posting-oriented participation appears more often among low-intensity users, network-building redirects users inside the active space, and inactivity serves as a persistent boundary, while higher-order motifs show that low-intensity liking can precede durable high-intensity regimes and that inactivity interrupts rather than erases prior patterns.

What carries the argument

The two-dimensional decomposition of participation into intensity (volume of actions) and style (distribution across posting, liking, and following) applied to monthly user aggregates.

Load-bearing premise

The near-complete sample of more than 80 percent of registered users and the monthly aggregation into intensity and style dimensions accurately reflect all forms of engagement without systematic bias from platform data availability or user registration patterns.

What would settle it

A replication on another platform that finds posting frequency predicts long-term retention and re-entry better than liking frequency would falsify the claim that low-vocality practices primarily structure participation.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Vocal production remains highly concentrated even in a near-complete user sample.
  • High-intensity engagement correlates more strongly with liking than with posting.
  • Posting-oriented behavior occurs more frequently among low-intensity users.
  • High-intensity likers and posters function as attractors that retain users within active participation.
  • Network-building actions redirect users inside the active space while inactivity selectively limits re-entry.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Platform designers could test whether surfacing low-vocality signals improves retention compared with post-centric feeds.
  • The intensity-style decomposition offers a template for re-analyzing existing datasets from other platforms without new data collection.
  • Computational models of user churn might incorporate motif-level interruption patterns to forecast re-entry probabilities more accurately.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper claims that analyzing over three billion activity records from a near-complete sample (>80% of registered Bluesky users) allows reconstruction of monthly user-level participation profiles distinguishing intensity (amount of engagement) from style (expression across actions like liking vs. posting). It reports that vocal production is concentrated, high-intensity engagement associates more with liking than posting, high-intensity likers and posters act as attractors in transitions, network-building redirects within active space, inactivity is a persistent boundary, and higher-order motifs show inactivity interrupting regimes with low-intensity liking sometimes preceding durable high-intensity engagement. The central conclusion is that differentiated low-vocality practices structure online participation, requiring a shift from post-centered measures to dynamic accounts of platform presence.

Significance. If the sample and dimension construction prove robust, the work would be significant for computational social science by providing large-scale empirical evidence that low-vocality actions (liking, following) are central to sustained participation rather than mere supplements to posting. The scale of the dataset (>3B records) and use of transition patterns plus higher-order motifs represent strengths that could enable falsifiable, dynamic models of platform presence if the underlying measures are validated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Data and Methods] Data and Methods (inferred from abstract claims): The assertion of a 'near-complete sample accounting for more than 80% of registered users' supplies no description of the sampling frame construction, exclusion criteria for the remaining ~20%, or any tests for differential data availability/registration bias that could systematically under-represent low-vocality profiles. This is load-bearing for all downstream claims about low-vocality practices structuring participation.
  2. [Intensity and Style Dimensions] Intensity and Style Dimensions (abstract): The paper aggregates into monthly intensity and style dimensions and reports associations (e.g., high-intensity with liking) but provides no details on how these dimensions were defined, validated against external criteria, or tested for measurement error. Without such validation, the distinction between intensity and style and the claim that they are 'often conflated' cannot be evaluated.
  3. [Transition Patterns and Motifs] Transition Patterns and Motifs (abstract): The reported transition patterns (attractors, boundaries) and higher-order motifs lack any mention of error estimates, confidence intervals, robustness checks across aggregation windows, or sensitivity to the monthly aggregation choice. These are central to the attractor and 'inactivity as persistent boundary' claims.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract is lengthy and packs many distinct findings into a single paragraph; breaking out the core empirical results more concisely would improve readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which identify key areas where additional methodological detail will strengthen the paper. We will revise the manuscript to expand the Data and Methods sections with the requested information and checks while preserving the core empirical claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Data and Methods] The assertion of a 'near-complete sample accounting for more than 80% of registered users' supplies no description of the sampling frame construction, exclusion criteria for the remaining ~20%, or any tests for differential data availability/registration bias that could systematically under-represent low-vocality profiles. This is load-bearing for all downstream claims about low-vocality practices structuring participation.

    Authors: We agree that the current description is insufficiently detailed. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection describing the Bluesky data acquisition process, the construction of the sampling frame from platform registration and activity logs that yields coverage of more than 80% of registered users, the explicit exclusion criteria applied to the remaining accounts, and any available checks or discussions of potential registration or availability biases, including whether low-vocality profiles appear differentially affected. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Intensity and Style Dimensions] The paper aggregates into monthly intensity and style dimensions and reports associations (e.g., high-intensity with liking) but provides no details on how these dimensions were defined, validated against external criteria, or tested for measurement error. Without such validation, the distinction between intensity and style and the claim that they are 'often conflated' cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We will expand the Methods section to supply the precise operational definitions of the intensity dimension (total monthly actions) and style dimension (distribution of action types, e.g., proportion of likes versus posts), the aggregation formulas used, and any internal consistency or external validation steps performed. We will also report basic measurement-error diagnostics and discuss how these choices support the intensity-style distinction. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Transition Patterns and Motifs] The reported transition patterns (attractors, boundaries) and higher-order motifs lack any mention of error estimates, confidence intervals, robustness checks across aggregation windows, or sensitivity to the monthly aggregation choice. These are central to the attractor and 'inactivity as persistent boundary' claims.

    Authors: We will add error estimates and confidence intervals to all reported transition probabilities and motif frequencies. We will further include sensitivity analyses that vary the temporal aggregation window (bi-weekly and quarterly) and report how the main attractor, boundary, and motif findings change or remain stable under these alternatives. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct empirical observations from activity records

full rationale

The paper performs descriptive aggregation of user activity records into intensity and style dimensions, then reports observed associations, transition patterns, and motifs. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions derived from models, or self-citations appear in the provided text. All claims reduce to direct computation on the input dataset rather than any self-referential definition or imported uniqueness result. The central claim is an interpretation of observed patterns, not a derivation that collapses to its inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

The work is purely observational and contains no mathematical derivations, free parameters, background axioms beyond standard data aggregation practices, or newly postulated entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5798 in / 1218 out tokens · 20405 ms · 2026-06-26T12:16:18.936906+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Online participation is often measured through visible expression, especially posting, yet many consequential forms of engagement occur through less vocal actions such as liking and following. Here we study how users inhabit Bluesky by reconstructing participation profiles from more than three billion activity records produced by a near-complete sample accounting for more than 80\% of registered users. We aggregate behavior into monthly user-level observations and distinguish two dimensions that are often conflated in platform analytics: intensity, capturing how much users engage, and style, capturing how engagement is expressed across actions. We find that vocal production is highly concentrated, but low-posting behavior does not imply absence from platform participation. High-intensity engagement is most strongly associated with liking rather than posting, while posting-oriented participation is more common among low-intensity users, indicating that visibility and sustained engagement should not be conflated. Transition patterns suggest that high-intensity likers and posters could be described as attractors; network-building redirects users within the active space; whereas observed inactivity acts as a persistent boundary that selectively limits re-entry. Higher-order motifs further show that inactivity often interrupts rather than erases prior regimes, and that low-intensity liking can precede durable high-intensity engagement. These results show that online participation is structured by differentiated low-vocality practices, calling for a shift from post-centered measures of activity toward dynamic accounts of platform presence. We identify a broader challenge for computational social science: platform participation cannot be adequately understood through the behavior of vocal minorities alone.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21665 by Andrea Failla, Giulio Rossetti, Luca Pappalardo, Veronica Mesina.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: User participation is represented along two empirically derived dimensions: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of participation profiles and transition dynamics. Panel A reports the cluster centroids for the intensity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The figure reports six representative user-month observations, one for each participation position obtained by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Distribution of two-dimensional participation profiles obtained by crossing intensity and style clusters. Flows connect [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: 2-D archetype transitions. Values in bold indicate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Frequent higher-order trajectory motifs identified with the PrefixSpan algorithm, together with representative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The platform society: Public values in a connective world

    Jos´ e Van Dijck, Thomas Poell, and Martijn De Waal. The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford university press, 2018

    2018

  2. [2]

    Patterns, models, and challenges in online social media: a survey.ACM Transactions on the Web, 20(2):1–34, 2026

    Niccol` o Di Marco, Anita Bonetti, Edoardo Di Martino, Edoardo Loru, Jacopo Nudo, Mario Edoardo Pandolfo, Giulio Pecile, Emanuele Sangiorgio, Irene Scalco, Simon Zollo, et al. Patterns, models, and challenges in online social media: a survey.ACM Transactions on the Web, 20(2):1–34, 2026

    2026

  3. [3]

    The affective evolution of social norms in social networks.IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 5(3):727–735, 2018

    Seyyed Hadi Sajadi, MohammadAmin Fazli, and Jafar Habibi. The affective evolution of social norms in social networks.IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 5(3):727–735, 2018. doi: 10.1109/TCSS.2018. 2855417

    work page doi:10.1109/tcss.2018 2018

  4. [4]

    Measuring online behavior change with observational studies: A review.ACM Computing Surveys, 58(10):1–36, 2026

    Arianna Pera, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales, and Luca Maria Aiello. Measuring online behavior change with observational studies: A review.ACM Computing Surveys, 58(10):1–36, 2026

    2026

  5. [5]

    Engage- ment, user satisfaction, and the amplification of divisive content on social media.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Nexus, 4(3):pgaf062, 2025

    Smitha Milli, Micah Carroll, Yike Wang, Sashrika Pandey, Sebastian Zhao, and Anca D Dragan. Engage- ment, user satisfaction, and the amplification of divisive content on social media.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Nexus, 4(3):pgaf062, 2025

    2025

  6. [6]

    Highly engaging events reveal semantic and temporal compression in online commu- nity discourse.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Nexus, 4(3):pgaf056, 2025

    Antonio Desiderio, Anna Mancini, Giulio Cimini, and Riccardo Di Clemente. Highly engaging events reveal semantic and temporal compression in online commu- nity discourse.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Nexus, 4(3):pgaf056, 2025

    2025

  7. [7]

    Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications

    danah boyd. Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Zizi Pa- pacharissi, editor,A Networked Self: Identity, Commu- nity, and Culture on Social Network Sites. Routledge, 2010

    2010

  8. [8]

    Marwick and danah boyd

    Alice E. Marwick and danah boyd. To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on twitter.Convergence, 17(2):139– 158, 2011. doi: 10.1177/1354856510394539

    work page doi:10.1177/1354856510394539 2011

  9. [9]

    Using affordance to understand usability of web3 so- cial media

    Maggie Yongqi Guan, Yaman Yu, and Kanye Ye Wang. Using affordance to understand usability of web3 so- cial media. InProceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–19, 2025

    2025

  10. [10]

    Listening, not lurking: The neglected form of participation.Cultures of participation, pages 63–74, 2011

    Kate Crawford. Listening, not lurking: The neglected form of participation.Cultures of participation, pages 63–74, 2011

    2011

  11. [11]

    The tip of the iceberg: How the social media production-consumption gap distorts public opinion for citizens and researchers, 2025

    Lisa Oswald, Ralph Hertwig, David Lazer, and Sebastian Stier. The tip of the iceberg: How the social media production-consumption gap distorts public opinion for citizens and researchers, 2025

    2025

  12. [12]

    Potential biases in big data: Omitted voices on social media.Social science computer review, 38(1):10–24, 2020

    Eszter Hargittai. Potential biases in big data: Omitted voices on social media.Social science computer review, 38(1):10–24, 2020

    2020

  13. [13]

    Power users in online democracy: Their origins and impact.Information, communication & society, 23(13):1838–1853, 2020

    Jonathan Bright, Sandra Bermudez, Jean-Benoit Pilet, and Thomas Soubiran. Power users in online democracy: Their origins and impact.Information, communication & society, 23(13):1838–1853, 2020

    2020

  14. [14]

    Penguin, 2011

    Eli Pariser.The filter bubble: How the new personalized web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin, 2011. 12

    2011

  15. [15]

    The affordances of social media platforms

    Taina Bucher and Anne Helmond. The affordances of social media platforms. In Jean Burgess, Alice Marwick, and Thomas Poell, editors,The SAGE Handbook of So- cial Media. SAGE, London, 2018

    2018

  16. [16]

    Jeffrey W Treem and Paul M Leonardi. Social media use in organizations: Exploring the affordances of vis- ibility, editability, persistence, and association.Annals of the International Communication Association, 36(1): 143–189, 2013

    2013

  17. [17]

    Bourdieu in digitale

    Paolo Magaudda et al. Bourdieu in digitale. capitale, distinzione e habitus all’epoca dei nuovi media. InPro- duzione, riproduzione e distinzione. Studiare il mondo sociale con (e dopo) Bourdieu, pages 75–90. CUEC, 2015

    2015

  18. [18]

    Beyond active engagement: the significance of lurkers in a polarized twitter debate.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17538, 2023

    Anees Baqir, Yijing Chen, Fernando Diaz-Diaz, Ser- can Kiyak, Thomas Louf, Virginia Morini, Valentina Pansanella, Maddalena Torricelli, and Alessandro Galeazzi. Beyond active engagement: the significance of lurkers in a polarized twitter debate.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17538, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Unveiling the drivers of active participation in social media discourse.Scientific Reports, 15(1):4906, 2025

    Anees Baqir, Yijing Chen, Fernando Diaz-Diaz, Ser- can Kiyak, Thomas Louf, Virginia Morini, Valentina Pansanella, Maddalena Torricelli, and Alessandro Galeazzi. Unveiling the drivers of active participation in social media discourse.Scientific Reports, 15(1):4906, 2025

    2025

  20. [20]

    Lurker demographics: Counting the silent

    Blair Nonnecke and Jenny Preece. Lurker demographics: Counting the silent. InProceedings of the SIGCHI con- ference on Human factors in computing systems, pages 73–80, 2000

    2000

  21. [21]

    Why lurkers lurk

    Blair Nonnecke and Jenny Preece. Why lurkers lurk. In AMCIS 2001 Proceedings, page 294, 2001. URLhttps: //aisel.aisnet.org/amcis2001/294

    2001

  22. [22]

    Silent participants: Getting to know lurkers better

    Blair Nonnecke and Jenny Preece. Silent participants: Getting to know lurkers better. InFrom Usenet to CoWebs: Interacting with social information spaces, pages 110–132. Springer, 2003

    2003

  23. [23]

    Vocal minority versus silent ma- jority: Discovering the opionions of the long tail

    Eni Mustafaraj, Samantha Finn, Carolyn Whitlock, and Panagiotis T Metaxas. Vocal minority versus silent ma- jority: Discovering the opionions of the long tail. In 2011 IEEE third international conference on privacy, se- curity, risk and trust and 2011 IEEE third international conference on social computing, pages 103–110. IEEE, 2011

    2011

  24. [24]

    Zhiwei Zhou and Erick Elejalde. Unveiling the silent ma- jority: stance detection and characterization of passive users on social media using collaborative filtering and graph convolutional networks.EPJ Data Science, 13(1): 28, 2024

    2024

  25. [25]

    was it something i said?

    Sherice Gearhart and Weiwu Zhang. “was it something i said?”“no, it was something you posted!” a study of the spiral of silence theory in social media contexts.Cy- berpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(4): 208–213, 2015

    2015

  26. [26]

    The spiral of silence a theory of public opinion.Journal of communication, 24(2):43– 51, 1974

    Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann. The spiral of silence a theory of public opinion.Journal of communication, 24(2):43– 51, 1974

    1974

  27. [27]

    The 1% rule in four digital health social networks: an observational study.Journal of med- ical Internet research, 16(2):e2966, 2014

    Trevor Van Mierlo. The 1% rule in four digital health social networks: an observational study.Journal of med- ical Internet research, 16(2):e2966, 2014

    2014

  28. [28]

    Characterizing the behavioral evolution of twit- ter users and the truth behind the 90-9-1 rule

    Alessia Antelmi, Delfina Malandrino, and Vittorio Scarano. Characterizing the behavioral evolution of twit- ter users and the truth behind the 90-9-1 rule. InCom- panion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Con- ference, pages 1035–1038, 2019

    2019

  29. [29]

    Bradley Carron-Arthur, John A Cunningham, and Kathleen M Griffiths. Describing the distribution of engagement in an internet support group by post fre- quency: A comparison of the 90-9-1 principle and zipf’s law.Internet Interventions, 1(4):165–168, 2014

    2014

  30. [30]

    How does social network diversity affect users’ lurking intention toward social network services? a role perspec- tive.Information & Management, 57(7):103258, 2020

    Xiaodan Liu, Qingfei Min, Dezhi Wu, and Zilong Liu. How does social network diversity affect users’ lurking intention toward social network services? a role perspec- tive.Information & Management, 57(7):103258, 2020

    2020

  31. [31]

    Pareto’s 80/20 law and social differentiation: A social entropy perspec- tive.Public Relations Review, 41(2):178–186, 2015

    Sorin Adam Matei and Robert J Bruno. Pareto’s 80/20 law and social differentiation: A social entropy perspec- tive.Public Relations Review, 41(2):178–186, 2015

    2015

  32. [32]

    Supporting opinions to fit in: a spiral of silence-theoretic explanation for establishing echo cham- bers and filter bubbles on social media.Internet Re- search, 35(7):30–51, 2025

    Maximilian Haug, Christian Maier, Heiko Gewald, and Tim Weitzel. Supporting opinions to fit in: a spiral of silence-theoretic explanation for establishing echo cham- bers and filter bubbles on social media.Internet Re- search, 35(7):30–51, 2025

    2025

  33. [33]

    The silent majority speaks: Inferring silent users’ opin- ions in online social networks

    Lei Wang, Jianwei Niu, Xuefeng Liu, and Kaili Mao. The silent majority speaks: Inferring silent users’ opin- ions in online social networks. InThe World Wide Web Conference, pages 3321–3327, 2019

    2019

  34. [34]

    ” who’s out there?” identifying and ranking lurkers in social net- works

    Andrea Tagarelli and Roberto Interdonato. ” who’s out there?” identifying and ranking lurkers in social net- works. InProceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM interna- tional conference on advances in social networks analysis and mining, pages 215–222, 2013

    2013

  35. [35]

    Characterizing silent users in social media communities

    Wei Gong, Ee-Peng Lim, and Feida Zhu. Characterizing silent users in social media communities. InProceed- ings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, volume 9, pages 140–149, 2015

    2015

  36. [36]

    Lurking in social networks: topology-based analysis and ranking methods.Social Network Analysis and Mining, 4(1):230, 2014

    Andrea Tagarelli and Roberto Interdonato. Lurking in social networks: topology-based analysis and ranking methods.Social Network Analysis and Mining, 4(1):230, 2014

    2014

  37. [37]

    Network models of minority opin- ion spreading: Using agent-based modeling to study pos- sible scenarios of social contagion.Social Science Com- puter Review, 34(5):567–581, 2016

    Javier Alvarez-Galvez. Network models of minority opin- ion spreading: Using agent-based modeling to study pos- sible scenarios of social contagion.Social Science Com- puter Review, 34(5):567–581, 2016

    2016

  38. [38]

    The sound of silence in social networks

    Jes´ us Aranda, Juan Francisco D´ ıaz, David Gaona, and Frank Valencia. The sound of silence in social networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.19685, 2024. 13

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Silence speaks volumes: Re-weighting techniques for under-represented users in fake news de- tection

    Mansooreh Karami, David Mosallanezhad, Paras Sheth, and Huan Liu. Silence speaks volumes: Re-weighting techniques for under-represented users in fake news de- tection. In2023 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW), pages 1430–1437. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  40. [40]

    The voice of silence: interpreting silence in truth discovery on social media

    Hang Cui and Tarek Abdelzaher. The voice of silence: interpreting silence in truth discovery on social media. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE/ACM International Con- ference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, pages 82–89, 2021

    2021

  41. [41]

    The virtual geographies of social net- works: a comparative analysis of facebook, linkedin and asmallworld.New media & society, 11(1-2):199–220, 2009

    Zizi Papacharissi. The virtual geographies of social net- works: a comparative analysis of facebook, linkedin and asmallworld.New media & society, 11(1-2):199–220, 2009

    2009

  42. [42]

    Lurking as a mode of listening in social media: motivations-based typologies.Digital Transformation and Society, 2(1):11–26, 2023

    Theodora Dame Adjin-Tettey and Anthea Garman. Lurking as a mode of listening in social media: motivations-based typologies.Digital Transformation and Society, 2(1):11–26, 2023. doi: 10.1108/DTS-07-2 022-0028

    work page doi:10.1108/dts-07-2 2023

  43. [43]

    The top five reasons for lurking: improving community ex- periences for everyone.Computers in human behavior, 20(2):201–223, 2004

    Jenny Preece, Blair Nonnecke, and Dorine Andrews. The top five reasons for lurking: improving community ex- periences for everyone.Computers in human behavior, 20(2):201–223, 2004

    2004

  44. [44]

    Under- standing lurkers in online communities: A literature re- view.Computers in Human Behavior, 38:110–117, 2014

    Na Sun, Patrick Pei-Luen Rau, and Liang Ma. Under- standing lurkers in online communities: A literature re- view.Computers in Human Behavior, 38:110–117, 2014

    2014

  45. [45]

    Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media.Continuum, 23(4):525–535, 2009

    Kate Crawford. Following you: Disciplines of listening in social media.Continuum, 23(4):525–535, 2009

    2009

  46. [46]

    Youth experiencing the algorithmic flow: The shared understanding of contemporary social media consumption.Italian Sociological Review, 16(16S):978– 978, 2026

    Luca Giuffr` e. Youth experiencing the algorithmic flow: The shared understanding of contemporary social media consumption.Italian Sociological Review, 16(16S):978– 978, 2026

    2026

  47. [47]

    Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social network sites.Jour- nal of computer-mediated communication, 13(1):276– 297, 2007

    Eszter Hargittai. Whose space? differences among users and non-users of social network sites.Jour- nal of computer-mediated communication, 13(1):276– 297, 2007

    2007

  48. [48]

    Curation bubbles.American Political Science Review, 119(4): 1704–1722, 2025

    JON GREEN, STEFAN MCCABE, SARAH SHUGARS, HANYU CHWE, LUKE HORGAN, SHUYANG CAO, and DAVID LAZER. Curation bubbles.American Political Science Review, 119(4): 1704–1722, 2025. doi: 10.1017/S0003055424000984

    work page doi:10.1017/s0003055424000984 2025

  49. [49]

    Harvard University Press, Cam- bridge, MA, 1984

    Pierre Bourdieu.Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Harvard University Press, Cam- bridge, MA, 1984

    1984

  50. [50]

    Social space and symbolic power.Soci- ological Theory, 7(1):14–25, 1989

    Pierre Bourdieu. Social space and symbolic power.Soci- ological Theory, 7(1):14–25, 1989. doi: 10.2307/202060

    work page doi:10.2307/202060 1989

  51. [51]

    Pierre Bourdieu and Lo¨ ıc J. D. Wacquant.An Invita- tion to Reflexive Sociology. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1992

    1992

  52. [52]

    Bluesky and the at protocol: Usable decentralized social media

    Martin Kleppmann, Paul Frazee, Jake Gold, Jay Graber, Daniel Holmgren, Devin Ivy, Jeromy Johnson, Bryan Newbold, and Jaz Volpert. Bluesky and the at protocol: Usable decentralized social media. InProceedings of the ACM Conext-2024 Workshop on the Decentralization of the Internet, pages 1–7, 2024

    2024

  53. [53]

    i’m in the bluesky tonight

    Andrea Failla and Giulio Rossetti. “i’m in the bluesky tonight”: insights from a year worth of social data.PloS one, 19(11):e0310330, 2024

    2024

  54. [54]

    Bluesky: Network topology, polarization, and algorithmic curation.PloS one, 20(2):e0318034, 2025

    Dorian Quelle and Alexandre Bovet. Bluesky: Network topology, polarization, and algorithmic curation.PloS one, 20(2):e0318034, 2025

    2025

  55. [55]

    A systematic review and meta-analysis of discrepancies between logged and self-reported digital media use.Nature human behaviour, 5(11):1535–1547, 2021

    Douglas A Parry, Brittany I Davidson, Craig JR Se- wall, Jacob T Fisher, Hannah Mieczkowski, and Daniel S Quintana. A systematic review and meta-analysis of discrepancies between logged and self-reported digital media use.Nature human behaviour, 5(11):1535–1547, 2021

    2021

  56. [56]

    Mining sequential patterns by pattern- growth: The prefixspan approach.IEEE Transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 16(11):1424–1440, 2004

    Jian Pei, Jiawei Han, Behzad Mortazavi-Asl, Jianyong Wang, Helen Pinto, Qiming Chen, Umeshwar Dayal, and Mei-Chun Hsu. Mining sequential patterns by pattern- growth: The prefixspan approach.IEEE Transactions on knowledge and data engineering, 16(11):1424–1440, 2004

    2004

  57. [57]

    [Accessed 01-01-2025]

    Bluesky User Age, Gender, & Demographics — explod- ingtopics.com.https://explodingtopics.com/blog/b luesky-users?, 2025. [Accessed 01-01-2025]

    2025

  58. [58]

    User session identification based on strong regu- larities in inter-activity time

    Aaron Halfaker, Os Keyes, Daniel Kluver, Jacob Thebault-Spieker, Tien Nguyen, Kate Grandprey- Shores, Anuradha Uduwage, and Morten Warncke- Wang. User session identification based on strong regu- larities in inter-activity time. InProceedings of the 24th International Conference on World Wide Web, pages 410–418, 2015

    2015

  59. [59]

    Multivariate observations

    J MacQueen. Multivariate observations. InProceedings ofthe 5th Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistic- sand probability, volume 1, pages 281–297. University of California press Oakland, CA, USA, 1967

    1967

  60. [60]

    Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis.Jour- nal of computational and applied mathematics, 20:53–65, 1987

    Peter J Rousseeuw. Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis.Jour- nal of computational and applied mathematics, 20:53–65, 1987

    1987

  61. [61]

    Data for the paper ”Low-Vocality Engagement Shapes Online Participation”, June 2026

    Andrea Failla, Veronica Mesina, and Giulio Rossetti. Data for the paper ”Low-Vocality Engagement Shapes Online Participation”, June 2026. URLhttps://doi. org/10.5281/zenodo.20764597. 14 Supporting Information Characterization of User Sessions and Activity Figure S1: Top: distribution of sessions per author (left); monthly user trend (middle); average user...

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.20764597 2026