TL;DR
This study examines Twitter's change from 140 to 280 characters, comparing predicted and actual user behaviors, revealing unanticipated cramming and suggesting further design adjustments to mitigate it.
Contribution
It provides an empirical analysis of user behavior shifts following a major platform design change, highlighting gaps between predictions and actual outcomes.
Findings
Users cram less under 280 characters than 140
Cramming re-emerged at the new character limit
Further increasing character limits could reduce cramming
Abstract
The design of online platforms is both critically important and challenging, as any changes may lead to unintended consequences, and it can be hard to predict how users will react. Here we conduct a case study of a particularly important real-world platform design change: Twitter's decision to double the character limit from 140 to 280 characters to soothe users' need to ''cram'' or ''squeeze'' their tweets, informed by modeling of historical user behavior. In our analysis, we contrast Twitter's anticipated pre-intervention predictions about user behavior with actual post-intervention user behavior: Did the platform design change lead to the intended user behavior shifts, or did a gap between anticipated and actual behavior emerge? Did different user groups react differently? We find that even though users do not ''cram'' as much under 280 characters as they used to under 140…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
