Digital cartography of user perception based on social media data as a resource for urban design
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11606/gtp.v20i2.239013Keywords:
digital mapping, design process, urban perception, user-generated dataAbstract
This research contributes to the field of studies that seek to utilize data from social networks and collaborative platforms for the understanding of urban phenomena. It aims to understand how the visualization of this data in user perception maps can be applied as a design tool. The main objective is to evaluate the possibilities of digital cartography of user perception generated through social media data as a design resource, by means of an evaluation by designers. The secondary objective involves the development of an artifact consisting of a cartography of user perceptions obtained from social media platforms. For this, the following methodological procedures were adopted: construction of the problem with a focus group of expert designers from a local public agency; data collection and filtering from Google Maps and Instagram; sentiment analysis using Amazon Comprehend; production of heat maps with Mapbox and an interactive map with Google Earth; and evaluation of the artifact by the expert focus group. After filtering, texts and images from 77 posts were used, of which 54 were classified as positive, 16 as neutral, 5 as mixed, and 2 as negative. The experts' evaluation indicated the tool's potential for assistance in the following design stages: receipt of design demand; interviews and questionnaires; user satisfaction evaluation
Downloads
References
ALIZADEH, T.; SARKAR, S.; BURGOYNE, S. Capturing citizen voice online: Enabling smart participatory local government. Cities, 95, Article 102400, 2019.
Amazon Comprehend Documentation. Disponível em: <https://docs.aws.amazon.com/comprehend/>. Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.
ATIENCIA, Y. et al. Spatio-temporal analysis: Using Instagram posts to characterize urban point-of-interest. 2020 Seventh International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG). Anais...IEEE, 2020.
BAER, M. F.; PURVES, R. S. Window Expeditions: A playful approach to crowdsourcing natural language descriptions of everyday lived landscapes. Applied geography (Sevenoaks, England), v. 148, n. 102802, p. 102802, 2022.
BARNS, S. Platform urbanism: Negotiating platform ecosystems in connected cities. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2020.
BENLI-TRICHET, M.C.; KÜBLER, D. The political origins of platform economy regulations. Understanding variations in governing Airbnb and Uber across cities in Switzerland. Policy & Internet 14(4), 2022, p.736-754. DOI: 10.1002/poi3.312
CAI, M. Natural language processing for urban research: A systematic review. Heliyon, v. 7, n. 3, p. e06322, 2021.
CAO, L. Participatory Governance in China:‘Informal public participation’through neighbourhood mobilisation. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space,40(8), 2022, p. 1693–1710.
DAO, C.; QI, J. Seeing and thinking about urban blue–green space: Monitoring public landscape preferences using bimodal data. Buildings, v. 14, n. 5, p. 1426, 2024.
DENG, Z.; LIN, Y.; ZHAO, M.; WANG, S. Collaborative planning in the new media age: The Dafo Temple controversy, China. Cities. v. 45, June 2015, p. 41-50.
DRESCH, A.; LACERDA, D. P.; ANTUNES, J. A. V. Design Science Research: Método de Pesquisa para Avanço da Ciência e Tecnologia. 2015.
FERREIRA, W. S.; VALE, G. M. V.; CORRÊA, V. S. Diffusion of Innovation in Technological Platforms: The Uber Case. BAR Brazilian Administration Review. 19 (3), 2022. DOI: 10.1590/1807-7692bar2022210101
GHAHRAMANI, M. et al. Tales of a city: Sentiment analysis of urban green space in Dublin. Cities (London, England), v. 119, n. 103395, p. 103395, 2021.
HE, J.; LIN, Y.; HOOIMEIJER, P.; MONSTADT, J. Informal participation in digital planning: How can third parties use social media to shift power relations in planning? Computers Environment and Urban Systems. v. 114(2), September 2024. DOI:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2024.102193
HEIKINHEIMO, V. et al. Understanding the use of urban green spaces from user-generated geographic information. Landscape and urban planning, v. 201, n. 103845, p. 103845, 2020.
HO, E. et al. Sentiment and semantic analysis: Urban quality inference using machine learning algorithms. iScience, v. 27, n. 7, p. 110192, 2024.
HOU, Y. et al. Residents’ spatial image perception of urban green space through cognitive mapping: The case of Beijing, China. Forests, v. 12, n. 12, p. 1614, 2021.
HUAI, S.; VAN DE VOORDE, T. Which environmental features contribute to positive and negative perceptions of urban parks? A cross-cultural comparison using online reviews and Natural Language Processing methods. Landscape and urban planning, v. 218, n. 104307, p. 104307, 2022.
LANGE, Michiel de. The Smart City you love to hate: Exploring the role of affect in hybrid urbanism. The Hybrid city II: Subtle revolutions proceedings, Athens, ano 2, v. 5, p. 77-84, 2013. Disponível em: http://themobilecity.nl/2013/05/17/the-smart-city-you-love-to-hate-exploring-the-role-of-affect-in-hybrid-urbanism-hybrid-city-2-conference-abstract/.
LI, S. et al. Understanding how people perceive and interact with public space through Social Media Big Data: A case study of Xiamen, China. Land, v. 13, n. 9, p. 1500, 2024.
LIN, Y. A Comparison of selected Western and Chinese smart governance: The application of ICT in governmental management, participation and collaboration. Telecommunications Policy, 42(10), 2018. p. 800-809.
LIN, Y. Social media for collaborative planning: A typology of support functions and challenges. Cities 125(3):103641, June 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.cities.2022.103641
LIN, Y.; KANT, S. Using Social Media for Citizen Participation: Contexts, Empowerment, and Inclusion. Sustainability. 13(12), 6635, 2021, DOI: 10.3390/su13126635
LIU, R.; XIAO, J. Factors affecting users’ satisfaction with urban parks through online comments data: Evidence from Shenzhen, China. International journal of environmental research and public health, v. 18, n. 1, p. 253, 2020.
KOWALIK, K. Social media as a distribution of emotions, not participation. Polish exploratory study in the EU smart city communication content. Cities. v. 108, Article102995, 2021.
MARTINO, M. et al. Senseable City. Senseable City, 2019. Disponível em: senseablecitylab.mit.edu/papers. Acesso em: 31 out. 2022.
MATTILA, H.; NUMMI, P. The challenge of the digital public sphere: Finnish experiences of the role of social media in participatory planning. Planning Theory &Practice, 23(3), 2022, p. 406–422.
MERMET, A. Can gentrification theory learn from Airbnb? Airbnbfication and the asset economy in Reykjavík. Environment and Planning A. v. 54(3): April 2021. DOI: 10.1177/0308518X221094616
PICON, Antoine; RATTI, Carlo. Mapping the Future of Cities: Cartography, Urban Experience, and Subjectivity, in New Geographies, n°9, 2017, pp. 64-67.
POELL, T.; VAN DIJCK, J. Social media and activist communication. In: The Routledge Companion to Alternative and Community Media, p. 527 – 537, 2015. DOI: 10.4324/9781315717241
QIAO, S.; YEH, A. G.-O. Understanding the effects of environmental perceptions on walking behavior by integrating big data with small data. Landscape and urban planning, v. 240, n. 104879, p. 104879, 2023.
RATTI, Carlo; CLAUDEL, Matthew. The city of tomorrow: Sensors, networks, hackers, and the future of urban life. 1. ed.: Yale University Press, 2018. 192 p. ISBN 978-0300204803.
REN, W. et al. Research on landscape perception of urban parks based on user-generated data. Buildings, v. 14, n. 9, p. 2776, 2024.
SPEAK, Andrew et al. #urbanforest: cultural ecosystem services of urban trees through the lens of Instagram. Journal of Place Management and Development, n. 4, v. 14, p. 497-513, 2021. DOI https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-08-2020-0079.
SONG, Y.; FERNANDEZ, J.; WANG, T. Understanding perceived site qualities and experiences of urban public spaces: A case study of social media reviews in Bryant Park, New York City. Sustainability, v. 12, n. 19, p. 8036, 2020.
TÖRNBERG, P. How sharing is the ‘sharing economy’? Evidence from 97 Airbnb markets. PLOS ONE 17(4): e0266998, 2022. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0266998
TÖRNBERG, P.; SÖDERSTRÖM, O. Comparative platform urbanism: Cities in a world of platforms. Digital Geography and Society. V. 8, June 2025.
TSAKONAS, G.; PAPATHEODOROU, C. Analysing and evaluating usefulness and usability in electronic information services. Journal of information science, v. 32, n. 5, p. 400–419, 2006.
WILLIAMSON, W.; RUMING, K. Can social media support large scale public participation in urban planning? The case of the #MySydney digital engagement campaign. International Planning Studies, 25(4), 2020, p. 355–371.
YANG, L.; MARMOLEJO DUARTE, C.; MARTÍ CIRIQUIÁN, P. Quantifying the relationship between public sentiment and urban environment in Barcelona. Cities (London, England), v. 130, n. 103977, p. 103977, 2022.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Maria Luisa Consalter Diniz, Rovenir Bertola Duarte
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright Notice
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain the copyright and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the article simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License BY NC ND, which allows the sharing of article with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are authorized to take additional contracts separately, for non-exclusive distribution of version of the article published in this journal (e.g. publish in institutional repository or as a book chapter), with acknowledgment of authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are allowed and encouraged to publish and distribute their research work online (e.g. in institutional repositories or on their personal page) at any point before or during the editorial process, as this can generate productive changes, as well as increase the impact and the citation of published article (See O Efeito do Acesso Livre).
