Conversations, Debates and Affiliation Networks on Twitter.

The question addressed is whether, in connection with education, Twitter can be considered both a communication centre and an affiliation space, where virtual communities with shared interests are formed. The 6654 tweets containing the #education or #educación hashtag sent on specific days in 2014, 2015 and 2016 defined the sample. The design was a combination of the quantitative and the qualitative. The results indicated that, when tweeters not directly related with education show interest in the topic of education, they do so exclusively during a limited time period; that is to say, no permanent interpersonal links were observed amongst such tweeters. Therefore, the conclusion was that the #educación and #education hashtags make it easier to share information and to make primarily non-activist comments related with education; furthermore the hashtags enable the creation of a virtual community of shared interests but do not lead to the establishment of a permanent community. In addition, the characteristics defining the Twitter network (speed and immediacy) were observed to promote monologues more than dialogues and to encourage information sharing more than any real intention to interact or conduct in-depth discussion. These points must be taken especially into account in education. INTRODUCTION Twitter has been proved a valuable space for making public opinion about recent events known (Madge, Meek & Tristram, 2009; Marwick & Boyd, 2011; Woodly, 2008). Social networks’ influence on citizens has even been thought to be able to outweigh that of conventional media (Bennett & Segerberg, 2012). In fact, studying Twitter communication processes and discussions through analysis of the hashtags used in messages has become a widespread practice accepted by most researchers (Bruns & Stieglitz, 2012; Veltri, 2013). As Zappavigna (2011) asserts, hashtag analysis reveals what people are talking about at a given time, and in addition using the linguistic code of the hashtag makes it easier for Twitter users to form communities that share interests. In short, Twitter may be regarded as an important source of knowledge about public opinion on a given topic. However, it is difficult to ascertain just how much microblogging reinforces true processes of communication and social affiliation and whether, on the contrary, microblogging encourages individualistic action devoid of social commitment and interest in others. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Communication Centre: Communication versus Information The foundation of this research is the difference between the concepts of “communication” and “information” according to Kaplún (1998:64), who defines communication as “that process whereby an individual enters into mental cooperation with another until they both reach a common awareness” and information as “any one-way transmission of messages from a transmitter to a receiver”. Kaplún (1998) insists that communication cannot be confined to an active transmitter (speaking) and a passive receiver (listening); instead, it is fundamental for both to interact and share their own experiences. As Noguera, Martínez-Polo and Grandío (2011:139) assert, “the socialising power of the media [. ]” has helped make the receiver a creator and transmitter of messages, and therefore it has boosted the increase in social actors who make their opinions heard. Twitter was created to facilitate communication amongst Twitter users and their followers. As we all know, this interaction process takes place through the posting of messages or tweets (García-Avilés, 2015). Microblogging has been considered a conversation or communication centre (Boyd, Golder, & Lotan, 2010; Del Fresno, 2014; Honeycutt & Herring, 2009; Larsson & Moe, 2012); heavy participation and great liveliness have been registered on the web through messages of no more than 140 characters. Analysts have looked at the tool’s linguistic potential on the basis of a given hashtag (Zappavigna, 2011) and even the coherence of Twitter conversations and the functions of the @ symbol when used in the body of messages (Honeycutt & Herring, 2009). In this context, some research points to a lack of interaction amongst users and considers Twitter a space for information spreading more than a space for conversation or interaction (Faktor, 2013; Lovejoy, Waters, & TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology – July 2017, volume 16 issue 3