This study reviews literature on the use of Social Media (SM) in emergency response operations while identifying gaps in this research stream that need attention from Information Systems (IS) researchers. The research is grounded in past works and attempts to build on research on the application of SM in emergencies. It focuses on understanding the role of SM in the prevention, management and response to emergencies. The review contains a detailed literature exposition of IS and disasters journals. The appraisal of such research stream led the review to focus on the concept of digital volunteerism as an offshoot of crowdsourcing initiatives. Findings from the review reveal that previous studies overlooked the interfacing challenges between formal and traditional aid agencies on one hand and digital humanitarians on the other. Consequently, we identify gaps in the extant literature and propose areas of interest for future research.
BoederP (2002) Non-profits on e: how non-profit organisations are using the internet for communication, fundraising, and community building. First Monday7(7).
2.
BoughzalaIDe VreedeTNguyenCDe VreedeGJ (2014) Towards a maturity model for the assessment of ideation in crowdsourcing projects. In: Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 6-9 January 2014, pp. 483–490. IEEE. doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2014.67
3.
BrabhamDC (2012) Motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application to improve public engagement in transit planning motivations for participation in a crowdsourcing application to improve public engagement in transit planning. Journal of Applied Communication Research40(3): 307–28. doi: 10.1080/00909882.2012.693940.
4.
BraunVClarkeV (2006) Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology3(2): 77–101.
BrittonNR (1988) Organised behaviour in disaster: a review. International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters6(3): 363–395.
7.
BrittonNR (1991) Permanent disaster volunteers: where do they fit?Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly20(4): 395–414. doi: 10.1177/089976409102000404.
8.
CampbellDA (2010) Stand by me: Organization founding in the aftermath of disaster. American Review of Public Administration40(3), 351–369. doi: 10.1177/0275074009336205.
9.
ChatfieldATSchollHJJBrajawidagdaU (2013) Tsunami early warnings via Twitter in government: Net-savvy citizens’ co-production of time-critical public information services. Government Information Quarterly30(4): 377–386.
10.
CheongMLeeVCS (2011) A microblogging-based approach to terrorism informatics: Exploration and chronicling civilian sentiment and response to terrorism events via Twitter. Information Systems Frontiers13(1): 45–59.
11.
DoanARamakrishnanRHalevyAY (2011) Crowdsourcing systems on the world-wide web. Communications of the ACM54(4): 86–96. doi:10.1145/1924421.1924442
Estellés-ArolasEGonza´lez-Ladro´n-de-GuevaraF (2012) Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. Journal of Information Science38(2): 189–200. doi: 10.1177/0165551512437638.
14.
FraustinoJDLiuBJinY (2012) Social media use during disasters: a review of the knowledge base and gaps. Science and Technology Directorate, US Department of Homeland Security. College Park, MD: START.
15.
FritzCEMathewsonJH (1957) Convergence behavior in disasters: A problem in social control - A special report prepared for the Committee on Disaster Studies. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. Washington.
16.
GeigerDSeedorfSSchulzeTNickersonRCSchaderM (2011) Managing the Crowd: Towards a Taxonomy of Crowdsourcing Processes. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth Americas Conference on Information Systems (AMCIS), Detroit, Michigan, USA, 4-7 August 2011, pp. 1–11. Association for Information Systems
17.
HaythornthwaiteC (2009) Crowds and communities: Light and heavyweight models of peer production. In: Proceedings of the 42nd Hawaii international conference on system sciences, Big Island, Hawaii, USA, 5-8 January 2009, pp. 1–10. IEEE.
HetmankL (2013) Components and Functions of Crowdsourcing Systems-A Systematic Literature Review. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik, Leipzig, Germany, 27th February – 1st March 2013, pp. 55–69.
20.
HiltzSRKushmaJAPlotnickL (2014) Use of Social Media by US Public Sector Emergency Managers: Barriers and Wish Lists. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, 18-21 May 2014, pp. 602–611.
21.
HoustonJB, et al. (2015) Social media and disasters: a functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. Disasters39(1): 1–22. doi: 10.1111/disa.12092.
22.
HoweJ (2006) The rise of crowdsourcing. Wired Magazine14(6): 1–4.
23.
HughesALTapiaAH (2015) Social media in crisis: when professional responders meet digital volunteers, Journal of Homeland Security and Emergency Management12(3): 679–706. doi: 10.1515/jhsem-2014-0080.
24.
HughesALPalenLSuttonJLiuSBViewegS (2008) Site-seeing in disaster: An examination of on-line social convergence. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, Washington, DC., 4-7 May 2008, pp. 44–54.
25.
HwangYCYuanSTWengJH (2011) A study of the impacts of positive/negative feedback on collective wisdom—case study on social bookmarking sites. Information Systems Frontiers13(2): 265–279.
26.
JomierJ (2017) Open science–towards reproducible research. Information Services & Use37(3): 361–367.
27.
JungJYMoroM (2014) Multi-level functionality of social media in the aftermath of the Great East Japan Earthquake. Disasters38(2): 123–143. doi: 10.1111/disa.12071.
28.
JungKParkHW (2014) Citizens’ social media use and homeland security information policy: Some evidences from Twitter users during the 2013 North Korea nuclear test. Government Information Quarterly31(4): 563–573. doi: 10.1016/j.giq.2014.06.003.
29.
KaplanAMHaenleinM (2010) Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media. Business Horizons53(1): 59–68. doi: 10.1016/J.BUSHOR.2009.09.003.
30.
KendraJMWachtendorfT (2003) Reconsidering convergence and converger legitimacy in response to the World Trade Center disaster. Research in Social Problems and Public Policy11(1): 97–122.
31.
KitturANickersonJVBernsteinMGerberEShawAZimmermanJLeaseMHortonJ (2013). The future of crowd work. In: Proceedings of the 2013 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, San Antonio, TX, USA, 23–27 February 2013, pp. 1301–1318.
32.
KohlerTFuellerJMatzlerKStiegerDFüllerJ, (2011). Co-creation in virtual worlds: The design of the user experience. MIS quarterly35(3): 773–788.
33.
KrepsGABosworthSL (2007) ‘Organizational adaptation to disaster’, In RodriguezHQuarantelliELDynesR eds. (ed.) Handbook of Disaster Research. New York, NY., pp. 297–315. Springer.
34.
LarssonAOÅgerfalkPJ (2013) Snowing, freezing…tweeting? Organizational Twitter use during crisis, First Monday18(6).
35.
LewisPNewburnTTaylorMMcgillivrayCGreenhillAFraymanHProctorR (2011) Reading the riots: investigating England’s summer of disorder. The Guardian and The London School of Economics and Political Science. London, UK. Available at: http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/id/eprint/46297
36.
LiuSB (2014) Crisis crowdsourcing framework: designing strategic configurations of crowdsourcing for the emergency management domain. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW)23(4): 389–443. doi: 10.1007/s10606-014-9204-3.
37.
LiuSBPalenLSuttonJHughesALViewegS (2008) In search of the bigger picture: The emergent role of on-line photo sharing in times of disaster. In: Proceedings of the 5th Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, Washington, DC., 4-7 May 2008, pp. 4–7.
38.
LunaSPennockMJ (2018) Social media applications and emergency management: A literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction28: 565–577. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2018.01.006.
39.
MajchrzakAJarvenpaaSLHollingsheadAB (2007) Coordinating expertise among emergent groups responding to disasters. Organization Science18(1): 147–161. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0228.
40.
MarjanovicSFryCChatawayJ (2012) Crowdsourcing based business models: In search of evidence for innovation 2.0. Science and Public Policy. Oxford University Press39(3): 318–332.
41.
McGrathKElbannaAHercheuiMPanagiotopoulosPSaadE. (2012) Exploring the democratic potential of online social networking: The scope and limitations of e-participation. Communications of the Association for Information Systems30(16): 239–254.
42.
MeierP (2011) New information technologies and their impact on the humanitarian sector. International Review of the Red Cross, 93(884): 1239–1263. doi: 10.1017/S1816383112000318.
43.
MillsAChenRLeeJRaghav RaoH (2009) Web 2.0 emergency applications: How useful can Twitter be for emergency response?Journal of Information Privacy and Security5(3): 3–26.
44.
MorrisL (2014) Contextualizing the power of social media: Technology, communication and the Libya Crisis, First Monday, 19(12).
45.
MorrisMR (2014) Social networking site use by mothers of young children. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA, 15–19 February2014, pp. 1272–1282.
46.
MubarekaSKhudhairyDABonnFAounS (2005) Standardising and mapping open-source information for crisis regions: the case of post-conflict Iraq. Disasters29(3): 237–254.
47.
NajahAJarbouiA (2015) Crowd funding for financing innovative and social entrepreneurship: literature review. Journal of Business Management and Economics3(6): 21–24.
48.
NogamiTYoshidaF (2014) Disaster myths after the Great East Japan Disaster and the effects of information sources on belief in such myths, Disasters38(s2): s190–s205.
49.
OCHA (2013) Humanitarianism in the Network Age. United Nations Publications. New York: OCHA.
50.
OhOAgrawalMRaoHR (2011). Information control and terrorism: Tracking the Mumbai terrorist attack through twitter. Information Systems Frontiers13(1): 33–43.
51.
PalenLViewegSAndersonKM (2010) Supporting “Everyday Analysts” in safety- and time-critical situations. The Information Society27(1): 52–62. doi: 10.1080/01972243.2011.534370.
52.
PalenLViewegSLiuSBHughesAL (2009) Crisis in a networked world: Features of computer-mediated communication in the April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech event. Social Science Computer Review27(4):467–80.
53.
PanagiotopoulosPBigdeliAZSamsS (2014) Citizen--government collaboration on social media: The case of Twitter in the 2011 riots in England. Government Information Quarterly. 31(3): 349–357.
54.
PobletMGarca-CuestaECasanovasP (2014) Crowdsourcing tools for disaster management: A review of platforms and methods, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 8929(Ccc), 261–274. doi: 10.1007/978-3-662-45960-7.
55.
PutnamL (2002) By choice or by chance: How the Internet is used to prepare for, manage, and share information about emergencies. First Monday7(11).
56.
QinZCaiJWangchenHZ (2015) How rumors spread and stop over social media: A multi-layered communication model and empirical analysis. Communications of the Association for Information Systems36(1)20: 369–391. doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03620
57.
QuarantelliELDynesRR (1977) Response to social crisis and disaster. Annual Review of Sociology3(1): 23–49. doi: 10.1146/annurev.so.03.080177.000323.
58.
ReuterCKaufholdMA (2018) Fifteen years of social media in emergencies: a retrospective review and future directions for crisis informatics. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management26(1): 41–57. doi: 10.1111/1468-5973.12196.
59.
RheingoldH (2007) Smart mobs: The next social revolution. New York: Basic Books.
60.
RozakisM (2007) The cultural context of emergencies: Seeking for a(n) holistic approach on disaster management. Disaster Prevention and Management16(2): 201–209. doi.org/10.1108/09653560710739522
61.
SabouJKleinS (2016) How Virtual and Technical Communities Can Contribute to U.N. Led Humanitarian Relief Operations – Boundary Spanning and The Exploration of Collaborative Information Practices, In: Proceedings of the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems-IT Governance for Future Society, Chiayi, Taiwan, 27 Jun - 1 Jul 2016, p. 17.
62.
SchmierbachMOeldorf-HirschA (2012) A little bird told me, so I didn’t believe it: Twitter, credibility, and issue perceptions. Communication Quarterly60(3): 317–337.
63.
StallingsRAQuarantelliEL (1985). Emergent citizen groups and emergency management. Public Administration Review45: 93–100.
64.
StarbirdK (2012) What “Crowdsourcing” Obscures: Exposing the Dynamics of Connected Crowd Work during Disaster, arXiv preprint arXiv:1204.3342.
65.
StarbirdKPalenL (2011) “Voluntweeters”: Self-Organizing by Digital Volunteers in Times of Crisis, In: Proceedings of the Special Interest Group on Computer–Human Interaction (SIGCHI) Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI 2011, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 7–12 May, 2011, pp. 1071–1080.
66.
StarbirdKPalenL (2013) Working and sustaining the virtual “Disaster Desk”. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work - CSCW ’13. New York, USA: ACM Press, pp. 491–502. doi: 10.1145/2441776.2441832.
67.
StarbirdKMuznyGPalenL (2012) Learning from the crowd: collaborative filtering techniques for identifying on-the-ground Twitterers during mass disruptions. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM)Vancouver, Canada, 22-25 April 2012, pp. 1–10.
68.
StiverABarrocaLMinochaSRichardsMRobertsD (2015) Civic crowdfunding research: Challenges, opportunities, and future agenda. New Media & Society17(2): 249–271.
69.
SuttonJ. N.PalenL.ShklovskiI. (2008) Backchannels on the front lines: Emergency uses of social media in the 2007 Southern California Wildfires. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, Washington, DC., 4-7 May 2008, pp. 1178–1204.
70.
TapiaAHMooreK (2014) Good enough is good enough: overcoming disaster response organizations’ slow social media data adoption, Computer Supported Cooperative Work: CSCW: An International Journal23(4–6): 483–512. doi: 10.1007/s10606-014-9206-1.
71.
TapiaAHMooreKJohnsonNJN (2013) Beyond the Trustworthy Tweet: A Deeper Understanding of Microblogged Data Use by Disaster Response and Humanitarian Relief Organizations, In: Proceedings of the 10th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, Baden-Baden, Germany, 12-15 May 2013, pp. 770–779. doi: 10.1145/1978942.1979102.
72.
Van Der MeijdenMJTangeHJTroostJHasmanA (2003) Determinants of success of inpatient clinical information systems: a literature review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association10(3): 235–43. doi: https://doi.org/10.1197/jamia.M1094
73.
Van GorpAF (2014) Integration of volunteer and technical communities into the humanitarian aid sector: Barriers to collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM) Conference, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA, 18-21 May 2014, pp. 622–631.
74.
ViewegSPalenLLiuSBHughesALSuttonJN (2008) Collective Intelligence in Disaster: Examination of the Phenomenon in the Aftermath of the 2007 Virginia Tech Shooting. Boulder, CO: University of Colorado.
75.
Vom BrockeJSimonsARiemerKNiehavesBPlattfautRClevenA (2015) Standing on the shoulders of giants: Challenges and recommendations of literature search in information systems research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems37(1): 9.
76.
WarrW (2008) Social software: fun and games, or business tools?Journal of Information Science34(4): 591–604. doi/abs/10.1177/0165551508092259
77.
WattalSSchuffDMandviwallaMWilliamsCB (2010) Web 2.0 and politics: the 2008 U.S. Presidential election and an e-politics research agenda. MIS Quarterly34(4): 669–688.
78.
WebbGR (1999) Individual and Organizational Response to Natural Disasters and Other Crisis Events: The Continuing Value of the DRC Typology. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society, Paper #277, University of Delaware Disaster Research Center, Boston, Massachusetts.
79.
WebsterJWatsonR T (2002) Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly pp. xiii--xxiii.
80.
WeinandyTJ (2016) Volunteer and technical communities in humanitarian response: lessons in digital humanitarianism from Typhoon Haiyan. UN Chronicle53(1): 29–30.
81.
WolfswinkelJFFurtmuellerEWilderomCPM (2013) Using grounded theory as a method for rigorously reviewing literature. European Journal of Information Systems22(1): 45–55. doi: 10.1057/ejis.2011.51.
82.
YuZZhangDYangDChenG (2012) Selecting the Best Solvers: Toward Community Based Crowdsourcing for Disaster Management, In: Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE Asia-Pacific Services Computing Conference, Guilin, China, 6-8 December 2012, pp. 271–277. IEEE. doi: 10.1109/APSCC.2012.20
83.
ZwassV (2010) Co-creation: toward a taxonomy and an integrated research perspective. International Journal of Electronic Commerce15(1): 11–48. doi: 10.2753/JEC1086-4415150101.
