SpringerLink
Log in

A Discourse Analysis of Tweets and Its Implications for Cryptocurrency Prices and Trade Volumes

  • Published:
Computational Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent advancements in cryptography and digital assets have triggered a profound transformation, causing a reorganization of the financial sector. The growing popularity of cryptocurrencies as investment instruments has raised concerns regarding the influencer mentions on social media impact on their price dynamics. This study assesses the discourse surrounding major cryptocurrencies and tokens within the decentralized finance (DeFi) and masternode sectors, examining its influence on prices and trading volumes during the period from 2019 to 2021. The study verifies the alignment between social media communications concerning these assets and their intended objectives. The analysis utilizes KHCoder software to explore topics with the highest public engagement, revealing that DeFi users frequently exhibit herd-like behavior by actively pursuing high-return farming trends, often at the expense of unique project attributes. In contrast, discourse surrounding masternode tokens more closely adheres to project objectives. The study employs panel models and Granger causality tests to investigate the relationship between cryptocurrency market performance, interactions on social media, and tweet sentiment. The findings substantiate a causal and temporal connection between micro-discourses on Twitter and asset prices, as well as trading volumes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Germany)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets used and analysed in this study are accessible from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  • Aharon, D. Y., Demir, E., Lau, C. K. M., & Zaremba, A. (2022). Twitter-based uncertainty and cryptocurrency returns. Research in International Business and Finance, 59(101), 546.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahmed, N. (2021). Nomiizz/KryptoOracle. https://github.com/Nomiizz/KryptoOracle, original-date: 2020-06-09T00:35:22Z.

  • Ante, L. (2023). How Elon musk’s Twitter activity moves cryptocurrency markets. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 186(122), 112.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bashir, H. A., & Kumar, D. (2023). Investor attention, Twitter uncertainty and cryptocurrency market amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Managerial Finance, 49(4), 620–642. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-09-2021-0414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Béjaoui, A., Mgadmi, N., Moussa, W., & Sadraoui, T. (2021). A short-and long-term analysis of the nexus between Bitcoin, social media and Covid-19 outbreak. Heliyon, 7(7), e07539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07539

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campino, J., Brochado, A., & Rosa, A. (2022). Initial coin offerings (ICOs): Why do they succeed? Financial Innovation, 8(1), 17. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-021-00317-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Critien, J. V., Gatt, A., & Ellul, J. (2022). Bitcoin price change and trend prediction through twitter sentiment and data volume. Financial Innovation, 8(1), 1–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drabble. (2021). Drabble/Twitter Sentiment And Cryptocurrencies

  • Easley, D., O’Hara, M., & Basu, S. (2019). From mining to markets: the evolution of bitcoin transaction fees. Journal of Financial Economics, 134(1), 91–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2019.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fang, F., Ventre, C., Basios, M., Kanthan, L., Martinez-Rego, D., Wu, F., & Li, L. (2022). Cryptocurrency trading: a comprehensive survey. Financial Innovation, 8(1), 1–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Furfaro, A., Argento, L., Sacca, D., Angiulli, F., & Fassetti, F. (2019). An Infrastructure for Service Accountability based on Digital Identity and Blockchain 3.0. In INFOCOM 2019—IEEE Conference on Computer Communications Workshops, INFOCOM WKSHPS 2019, pp. 632–637, https://doi.org/10.1109/INFCOMW.2019.8845092

  • Gherghina, ÅžC., & Simionescu, L. N. (2023). Exploring the asymmetric effect of Covid-19 pandemic news on the cryptocurrency market: evidence from nonlinear autoregressive distributed lag approach and frequency domain causality. Financial Innovation, 9(1), 1–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guzmán, A., Pinto-Gutiérrez, C., & Trujillo, M. A. (2021). Trading cryptocurrencies as a pandemic pastime: COVID-19 lockdowns and bitcoin volume. Mathematics, 9(15), 1771. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9151771

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hasan, M., Naeem, M. A., Arif, M., Shahzad, S. J. H., & Vo, X. V. (2022). Liquidity connectedness in cryptocurrency market. Financial Innovation, 8, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higuchi, K. (2016). Kh coder 3 reference manual.

  • Hong, Y. (2018). How the discussion on a contested technology in twitter changes: Semantic network analysis of tweets about cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. In International Telecommunications Society Proceedings.

  • Kaplan, C., Aslan, C., & Bulbul, A. (2018). Cryptocurrency Word-of-Mouth Analysis via Twitter. ResearchGate.

  • Kraaijeveld, O., & De Smedt, J. (2020). The predictive power of public Twitter sentiment for forecasting cryptocurrency prices. Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, 65(101), 188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2020.101188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehner, E., Hunzeker, D., & Ziegler, J. R. (2017). Funding science with science: Cryptocurrency and independent academic research funding. Ledger, 2, 65–76. https://doi.org/10.5195/ledger.2017.108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naeem, M. A., Mbarki, I., Suleman, M. T., Vo, X. V., & Shahzad, S. J. H. (2020). Does Twitter happiness sentiment predict cryptocurrency? International Review of Finance. https://doi.org/10.1111/irfi.12339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schär, F. (2021). Decentralized finance: on blockchain-and smart contract-based financial markets. Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis Review 103(2):153–174. https://doi.org/10.20955/r.103.153-74

  • Shen, D., Urquhart, A., & Wang, P. (2019). Does Twitter predict bitcoin? Economics Letters, 174, 118–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2018.11.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Souza D.M.S.d., Martins, O.S. (2022). Brazilian stock market performance and investor sentiment on Twitter. Revista de Gestão ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). https://doi.org/10.1108/REGE-07-2021-0145.

  • Stepanova, V., & Eriņš, I. (2021). Review of decentralized finance applications and their total value locked. TEM Journal 10(1):327–333, https://doi.org/10.18421/TEM101-41

  • Wang, Z. (2020). A decentralized prediction market platform based on blockchain and masternode technologies. China Communications. 17(9):25–33, https://doi.org/10.23919/JCC.2020.09.003.

  • Zetzsche, D., Arner, D., & Buckley, R. (2020). Decentralized finance. Journal of Financial Regulation, 6(2), 172–203. https://doi.org/10.1093/jfr/fjaa010

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Professor Valdir Machado Valadão Junior for reviewing our initial draft and offering invaluable feedback. The authors retain the responsibility for any remaining errors.

Funding

No financial aid was obtained to conduct the research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Business and Management, Federal University of Uberlândia, Uberlândia, MG, Brazil

    Kamyr Gomes de Souza, Flavio Barboza & Daniel Vitor Tartari Garruti

Authors
  1. Kamyr Gomes de Souza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Flavio Barboza
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Vitor Tartari Garruti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

This work was a joint effort of all authors. KGdS conceptualised, and both Kamyr GdS and FB conducted the methodology and data analysis. KGdS wrote the initial draft, with FB and DVTG reviewing and editing it. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kamyr Gomes de Souza.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

See Tables 7 and 8.

Table 7 Central terms in tweets
Full size table
Table 8 Pandemic terms searshed on tweets
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Souza, K.G., Barboza, F. & Garruti, D.V.T. A Discourse Analysis of Tweets and Its Implications for Cryptocurrency Prices and Trade Volumes. Comput Econ (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-023-10504-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10614-023-10504-1

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation