Abstract

There has been much excitement among quantitative geographers about newly available data sets, characterized by high volume, velocity, and variety. This phenomenon is often labeled as “Big Data” and has contributed to methodological and empirical advances, particularly in the areas of visualization and analysis of social networks. However, a fourth v—veracity (or lack thereof)—has been conspicuously lacking from the literature. This article sets out to test the potential for verifying large data sets. It does this by cross‐comparing three unrelated estimates of retail flows—human movements from home locations to shopping centers—derived from the following geo‐coded sources: (1) a major mobile telephone service provider; (2) a commercial consumer survey; and (3) geotagged Twitter messages. Three spatial interaction models also provided estimates of flow: constrained and unconstrained versions of the “gravity model” and the recently developed “radiation model.” We found positive relationships between all data‐based and theoretical sources of estimated retail flows. Based on the analysis, the mobile telephone data fitted the modeled flows and consumer survey data closely, while flows obtained directly from the Twitter data diverged from other sources. The research highlights the importance of verification in flow data derived from new sources and demonstrates methods for achieving this.

Highlights

  • Much has been written about “Big Data”: definitions, ethics and the methodological challenges the phenomenon poses (Boyd and Crawford 2012; Davis 2012; Madden 2012)

  • We argue that it is lack of veracity that is most associated with Big Data, compared with more conventional official data sets used in geographical research

  • The results, primarily obtained from the Acxiom and mobile telephone data sets, demonstrate the potential for new Big Data to explore longstanding issues such as those raised by Dickinson more than 80 years ago

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Much has been written about “Big Data”: definitions, ethics and the methodological challenges the phenomenon poses (Boyd and Crawford 2012; Davis 2012; Madden 2012).

Methods
Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.