Town-Watching Workshop Using Disaster Information Tweeting and Mapping System †
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Facilitate phases of map making and a presentation in town watching.
- Increase the popularity of the system by educating people about using the system.
- Use of social media or SNS to disseminate information during an emergency through posts on Twitter.
2. Disaster Information Tweeting/Mapping System
2.1. Disaster Information Tweeting System (DITS)
- Using location specification functions, such as the global positioning system, the user’s current geolocation information is acquired. Based on the acquired location information, the street address of the user’s current location, the hashtag of the form “#(municipality name) disaster,” and the Military Grid Reference System code [29] are automatically attached to the tweet.
- In cases when the user needs to be rescued, the hashtag #救助 (救助 means rescue in Japanese) can be attached to the tweet. Twitter Japan officially recommends using this hashtag when a user needs to be rescued [30].
- A photo can be attached.
2.2. Disaster Information Mapping System (DIMS)
- DIMS displays a map of the most recent 30 tweets posted using DITS within 20 km of the user’s location.
- The map is centered on the user’s current position.
- Depending on whether the rescue hashtag and an image are attached, the shape and color of the icon indicate the position of the tweet change.
3. Town-Watching Workshop
- Objective 1. To discuss the effectiveness of SNS, such as Twitter, in the disaster situations.
- Objective 2. To review the town in terms of disaster prevention and mitigation.
- 13:35–13:50 (15 min): Introduction and short lecture
- 13:50–14:50 (60 min): Town watching using DITS
- 15:00–15:15 (15 min): Group discussion using DIMS
- 15:15–15:35 (20 min): Report of group discussion
- 15:35–15:45 (10 min): Summary
3.1. Town Watching Using DITS
- Dangerous places or objects: 17 items
- Useful facilities in case of disasters: 15 items
- Evacuation sites or places for the citizens: 21 items
- Objects such as foods in case of disasters: 3 items
- Others: 3 items
3.2. Group Discussion for Review Using DIMS
- Verify the posts submitted in town watching using DIMS and review the town for “disaster prevention and mitigation.” Then, what and where are “useful/notable places/things?” What are the issues for “disaster prevention and mitigation?”
- What kinds of posts are useful to you when you use social media such as Twitter during and after a disaster? Moreover, if the system was available when the Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake occurred, how would you utilize it?
3.3. Questionnaire Survey
3.3.1. Preliminary Survey
- Q.1-1: What type of cellular phone do you have?Answer choices:
- (1)
- Both smart and feature phones
- (2)
- A smartphone only
- (3)
- A feature phone (conventional cellular phone) only
- (4)
- None
- Q.1-2: What type of damage did you experience during the Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake? Please check all that apply (this question allows multiple answers).Answer choices:
- (1)
- Power was cut off
- (2)
- Water was cut off
- (3)
- Gas was cut off
- (4)
- Contact with his/her family was lost
- (5)
- Evacuation
- (6)
- Others
- (7)
- No damage
- Q.1-3: Do you think that posting on SNS, such as Twitter and Facebook, during disasters is helpful for mitigating damages?Answer choices:
- (1)
- Strongly disagree
- (2)
- Disagree
- (3)
- Neutral
- (4)
- Agree
- (5)
- Strongly agree
- Q.1-4: Select appropriate choice(s) about your experiences regarding the use of SNS during disasters. Please check all that apply (this question allows multiple answers).Answer choices:
- (1)
- I posted the pictures or texts about my suffering in a previous disaster.
- (2)
- I shared or retweeted other user’s/users’ post about my suffering in a previous disaster.
- (3)
- I shared or retweeted other user’s/users’ post since I never suffered a disaster.
- (4)
- I have never used SNS.
- Q.1-5: From the experiences of the Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake, what issues or things needed to be taken into consideration in the area?A total of 19 people responded:
- -
- Broadcasting cars should be provided to share local information.
- -
- Safe evacuation sites, food and water for an emergency, evacuation support for vulnerable people, and local disaster prevention plan are required.
- -
- Reliability of the infrastructure is important for hospitals supporting elderly people, and constant power supply is required in the houses where people with respiratory disturbance are living.
- -
- Sufficient information about evacuation sites was not provided.
- -
- Sharing information procedure about evacuation sites (e.g., whether the evacuation sites are open or not) is required.
- -
- The utilization of SNS is required.
- -
- We need to understand the routes and the location of the evacuation sites and routes to reach there in advance.
- -
- The system to support elderly people living alone has not yet been provided. Many high school or college students do not join self-government associations; therefore, a system to support these people is needed in case of emergency.
- -
- No preparation for lack of power.
- -
- Drills lecture classes are necessary several times a year to know evacuation sites and understand the quantity of required foods and drinks during the emergency.
- -
- Information sources and people’s conduct during an emergency should be known in advance. In an emergency situation, information is difficult to obtain because of the power cut off.
- -
- It was difficult to communicate relevant information.
3.3.2. Post-Survey
- Q.2-1: Did you identify some new findings or notable information for disaster prevention via town watching? Please select one appropriate choice.
- Q.2-2: Did you identify new findings or notable information for disaster prevention via discussion after town watching? Please select one appropriate choice.Answer choices for Q.2-1 and Q.2-2:
- (1)
- Strongly disagree
- (2)
- Disagree
- (3)
- Agree
- (4)
- Strongly agree
- Q.2-3: If you select (3) Agree or (4) Strongly agree in Q.2-1 or Q.2-2, what is/are your finding/findings or notable information? Please describe in sufficient detail.Described answers: A total of 16 people responded.
- -
- There are many trees in this town. Based on the town’s features, trees are likely to be dangerous during earthquakes or typhoons because they can fall on people.
- -
- Many evacuation sites could be identified.
- -
- Old buildings and big trees should be sufficiently protected.
- -
- Many objects were identified, which could easily fall during a disaster.
- -
- In other areas, evacuation methods were displayed and they should also be introduced in this town.
- -
- There were obstacles and dangerous points at some evacuation places, which were difficult to handle because of the lack of experience related to evacuation procedures.
- -
- Very important to have daily evacuation drills as there are many dangerous locations in the town.
- Q.2-4: Have you ever experienced town watching before today’s workshop?
- Answer choices: Yes / No (first)
- Result: Yes: 9 (40.9%), No: 12 (54.5%), No answer: 1 (4.54%)
- Q.2-5: If you checked "Yes" for Q.2-4, how did you feel about town watching using DITS/DIMS as compared with the previous town watching method that did not use the system?Described answers: A total of six people responded.
- -
- The system can be used for other purposes apart from an emergency.
- -
- The address of the current location is automatically obtained as it is not required to input the address as compared with the other systems. The post of other users can be seen.
- -
- The places where the pictures were taken could be easily tracked through the online map.
- -
- Concern about battery consumption.
- Q.2-6: If you checked “No” for Q.2-4, how did you feel about the town watching using DITS/DIMS?Described answers: A total of six people responded.
- -
- Tablets are used to obtain the address of our current location automatically, which is very useful.
- -
- The system is easy to use.
- -
- Inputting characters is troublesome.
- Q.3-1: Do you think that the DITS/DIMS systems are user-friendly? Please select one appropriate choice.
- Q.3-2: Would you think of using the system in the future? Please select one appropriate choice.
- Q.3-3: Do you think the system is useful in disaster situations? Please select one appropriate choice.Answer choices for Q.3-1 to Q.3-3:
- (1)
- Strongly disagree
- (2)
- Disagree
- (3)
- Agree
- (4)
- Strongly agree
- Q.3-4: If you selected (1) or (2) in Q.3-1 or Q.3-2, please describe the reasons for your choice.Described answers: Three people responded to these questions:
- -
- Elderly people cannot use this system, and the navigation text on the screen should be more user-friendly.
- -
- Tweets posted in this application and other applications should be displayed on an online map.
- -
- At the start of the workshop, the system was not useful for identifying necessary information. However, after the group discussion, this problem was overcome. In addition, depending on the contents, the coloring of the icons on the map should vary; depending on the length of the post, the size of the icons on the map should vary, and there should be a website that provides a summary of the information posted in the system.
- Q.4-1: If the system was available during Hokkaido Eastern Iburi Earthquake, how would you use it?Described answers: Eight people responded to this question:
- -
- Maybe I could not afford to use it.
- -
- Obtain information about road situations such as collapses and liquefaction.
- -
- Get information about the area where the power supply has recovered.
- -
- Use the media to share local information within Minami Ward.
- Q.4-2: Do you think that posting on SNS, such as Twitter and Facebook, during disasters is helpful for mitigating damages? Please select one appropriate choice.Answer choices:
- (1)
- Strongly disagree
- (2)
- Disagree
- (3)
- Neutral
- (4)
- Agree
- (5)
- Strongly agree
- Q.4-3: Please select appropriate choices that indicate what you will do when a disaster occurs. Please check all that apply (this question allows multiple answers).Answer choices:
- (1)
- I will post pictures or texts about the situations and my suffering during a disaster.
- (2)
- I will share or retweet other user’s/users’ posts about their suffering in the disaster.
- (3)
- I will share or retweet other user’s/users’ posts about their safety in the disaster.
- (4)
- I do not want to use SNS in the future.
3.4. Discussion
- Three respondents answered “Disagree” to Q.1-3, however they changed to “Strongly agree” or “Agree” in Q.4-2. One of the respondents described a reason that the current information can be shared in real time by SNS.
- One respondent answered “Agree” to Q.1-3, however it changed to “Disagree” in Q.4-2. The respondent was a man in his 70s and did not describe the reason why he disagreed in the post survey. Since he had no experience to use Twitter and answered “No” to the questions about DITS/DIMS system (Q.3-1 to Q.3-3), the system might not be suitable for him.
3.5. Post-Meeting
4. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Imran, M.; Diaz, F.; Vieweg, S. Processing Social Media Messages in Mass Emergency: A Survey. ACM Comput. Surv. 2015, 47, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kropczynski, J.; Grace, R.; Coche, J.; Jalse, S.; Obeysekare, E.; Montarnal, A.; Bénaben, F.; Tapia, A. Identifying Actionable Information on Social Media for Emergency Dispatch. In Proceedings of the ISCRAM Asia Pacific 2018, Wellington, New Zealand, 5–7 November 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Grace, R.; Halse, S.; Kropczynski, J.; Tapia, A.; Fonseca, F. Integrating Social Media in Emergency Dispatch via Distributed Sensemaking. In Proceedings of the 16th ISCRAM Conference, Valencia, Spain, 19–22 May 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Tomaszewski, B.; Judex, M.; Szarzynski, J.; Radestock, C.; Wirkus, L. Geographic Information Systems for Disaster Response: A Review. J. Homel. Secur. Emerg. Manag. 2015, 12, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tomaszewski, B. A Survey of GIS for Disaster Management. In Geographic Information System (GIS) for Disaster Management; CRC Press: Florida, FL, USA, 2014; pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Andrews, S.; Day, T.; Domdouzis, K.; Hirsch, L.; Lefticaru, R.; Orphanides, C. Analyzing Crowd-Sourced Information and Social Media for Crisis Management. In Application of Social Media in Crisis Management—Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications; Akhgar, B., Staniforth, A., Waddington, D., Eds.; Springer International Publishing AG: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 77–111. [Google Scholar]
- Castillo, C. Volume: Data Acquisition, Storage, and Retrieval. In Big Crisis Data; Cambridge University Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 18–34. [Google Scholar]
- Simon, T.; Goldberg, A.; Adini, B. Socializing in emergencies—A review of the use of social media in emergency situations. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2015, 35, 609–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pourebrahim, N.; Sultana, S.; Edwards, J.; Gochanour, A.; Mohanty, S. Understanding communication dynamics on Twitter during natural disasters: A case study of Hurricane Sandy. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2019, 37, 101176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alam, F.; Ofli, F.; Imran, M.; Aupetit, M. A Twitter Tale of Three Hurricanes: Harvey, Irma, and Maria. In Proceedings of the 15th ISCRAM Conference, Rochester, NY, USA, 20–23 May 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Murzintcev, N.; Cheng, C. Disaster Hashtags in Social Media. Int. J. Geo Inf. 2017, 6, 204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martínez-Rojas, M.; Pardo-Ferreira, M.; Rubio-Romero, J. Twitter as a tool for the management and analysis of emergency situations: A systematic literature review. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 43, 196–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fujishiro, H.; Matsushita, M.; Ogasawara, M. Effective Use of Social Media in Large-Scale Disasters: The Applicability of Information Triage. Socio Inform. 2018, 6, 49–63. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
- Nishikawa, S.; Tanaka, N.; Utsu, K.; Uchida, O. Time Trend Analysis of “#Rescue” Tweets During and After the 2017 Northern Kyushu Heavy Rain Disaster. In Proceedings of the 2018 5th International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies for Disaster Management (ICT-DM 2018), Sendai, Japan, 4–7 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Nishikawa, S.; Tanaka, N.; Otaka, R.; Sato, H.; Kondo, M.; Uchida, O.; Utsu, K. Analysis of rescue request tweets in the July 2018 heavy rain disaster in Japan. IEICE Tech. Rep. 2018, 118, 43–48. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
- Yamada, S.; Utsu, K.; Uchida, O. An Analysis of Tweets Posted During 2018 Western Japan Heavy Rain Disaster. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Big Data and Smart Computing (BigComp 2019), Kyoto, Japan, 27 February–2 March 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Kosugi, M.; Utsu, K.; Tajima, S.; Tomita, M.; Kajita, Y.; Yamamoto, Y.; Uchida, O. Improvement of Twitter-based Disaster-related Information Sharing System. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies for Disaster Management (ICT-DM’17), Münster, Germany, 11–13 December 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Uchida, O.; Kosugi, M.; Endo, G.; Funayama, T.; Utsu, K.; Tajima, S.; Tomita, M.; Kajita, Y.; Yamamoto, Y. A real-time information sharing system to support self-, mutual-, and public-help in the aftermath of a disaster utilizing twitter. IEICE Trans. Fundam. 2016, 99, 1551–1554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Okuma, T.; Yamamoto, K. Study on a Social Media GIS to Accumulate Urban Disaster Information: Accumulation of Disaster Information during Normal Times for Disaster Reduction Measures. Socio Inform. 2013, 2, 49–65. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
- Ogawa, Y.; Fernandez, L.A.; Yoshimura, T. Town watching as a tool for citizen participation in developing countries: Applications in disaster training. Int. J. Mass Emerg. Disasters 2005, 23, 5–36. [Google Scholar]
- Yoshida, Y.; Takeuchi, Y.; Shaw, R. Town watching as a useful tool in urban risk reduction in Saijo. Community Environ. Disaster Risk Manag. 2009, 1, 189–205. [Google Scholar]
- Ogawa, H. Development of A Workshop Program to Introduce Town Watching and Map Making by Using A Geographic Information System. J. Hum. Ergol. 2010, 40, 157–161. [Google Scholar]
- Takeuchi, Y.; XU, W.; Kajitani, Y.; Okada, N. Investigating Risk Communication Process for Community’s Disaster Reduction with a Framework of “Communicative Survey Method. J. Nat. Disaster Sci. 2012, 33, 49–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Maryanto, S.; Nadhir, A.; Santoso, R.D. Implementation of Town Watching and Development of Observatory for Community Education in Volcano Hazard Mitigation (study case at Kelud and Arjuno-Welirang volcanos, East Java, Indonesia). In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Frontiers of Educational Technologies (ICFET’18), Moscow, Russia, 25–27 January 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Shaw, R.; Takeuchi, Y. Town Watching Handbook for Disaster Education: Enhancing Experimental Learning; EU, UNISDR, 2009. Available online: https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/publications/12062 (accessed on 1 April 2019).
- Tajima, S.; Murakami, Y.; Uchida, O.; Kajita, Y. The Development of a Creation System for a Disaster-avoidance Map Using a Smartphone and the Evaluation of Educational Practice. Jpn. Soc. Educ. Technol. 2017, 41, 85–88. (In Japanese) [Google Scholar]
- Enokida, S.; Yoshino, T.; Fukushima, T.; Sugimoto, K.; Egusa, N. An Integrated Support System for Disaster Prevention Map-Making Using Town-Walk Information Gathering. In Proceedings of the Collaboration Technologies and Social Computing (CollabTech 2018), Costa de Caparica, Portugal, 5–7 September 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Uchida, O.; Tajima, S.; Kajita, Y.; Murakami, Y.; Utsu, K.; Yamada, S. Disaster Prevention Education Using Disaster Information Sharing System DITS/DIMS. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEICE Engineering Sciences Society Conference, Kanazawa, Japan, 11–14 September 2018. (In Japanese). [Google Scholar]
- Military Map Reading 201. Available online: http://earth-info.nga.mil/GandG/coordsys/mmr201.pdf (accessed on 30 April 2019).
- @TwitterLifeline, Twitter. Available online: https://twitter.com/TwitterLifeline/status/1016519147738419201 (accessed on 30 April 2019).
Age Groups | Total | Gender | |
---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | ||
20s | 2 | 2 | 0 |
30s | 3 | 3 | 0 |
40s | 0 | 0 | 0 |
50s | 4 | 2 | 2 |
60s | 5 | 2 | 3 |
70s | 8 | 4 | 4 |
Total | 22 | 13 | 9 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | Groups of Smartphone Owners/Non-Owners | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | Owners | Non-Owners | ||
(5) Strongly Agree | 7 | 5 | 2 | 5 | 2 | 6 | 1 |
(4) Agree | 8 | 4 | 4 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 3 |
(3) Neutral | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
(2) Disagree | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 21 | 13 | 8 | 9 | 12 | 16 | 5 |
No answer | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
Average score in respondents | 3.90 | 3.85 | 4.00 | 4.22 | 3.67 | 3.88 | 4.00 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Female | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | ||
(4) Strongly Agree | 10 | 6 | 4 | 7 | 3 |
(3) Agree | 12 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 10 |
(2) Disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 22 | 13 | 9 | 9 | 13 |
No answer | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Ave. score in respondents | 3.45 | 3.46 | 3.44 | 3.78 | 3.23 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Female | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | ||
(4) Strongly Agree | 9 | 5 | 4 | 6 | 3 |
(3) Agree | 11 | 6 | 5 | 2 | 9 |
(2) Disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 20 | 11 | 9 | 8 | 12 |
No answer | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Ave. score in respondents | 3.45 | 3.45 | 3.44 | 3.75 | 3.25 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | Groups of Smartphone Owners/Non-Owners | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | Owners | Non-Owners | ||
(4) Strongly Agree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
(3) Agree | 14 | 9 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 11 | 3 |
(2) Disagree | 3 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 17 | 12 | 5 | 7 | 10 | 13 | 4 |
No answer | 5 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
Average score in respondents | 2.82 | 2.75 | 3.00 | 2.86 | 2.80 | 2.85 | 2.75 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | Groups of Smartphone Owners/Non-Owners | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | Owners | Non-Owners | ||
(4) Strongly Agree | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
(3) Agree | 10 | 6 | 4 | 2 | 8 | 8 | 2 |
(2) Disagree | 4 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 3 | 1 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 17 | 13 | 4 | 7 | 10 | 14 | 3 |
No answer | 5 | 0 | 5 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 3 |
Average score in respondents | 2.94 | 2.92 | 3.00 | 2.86 | 3.00 | 3.00 | 2.67 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | Groups of Smartphone Owners/Non-Owners | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | Owners | Non-Owners | ||
(4) Strongly Agree | 3 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
(3) Agree | 15 | 9 | 6 | 5 | 10 | 11 | 4 |
(2) Disagree | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 19 | 13 | 6 | 7 | 12 | 14 | 5 |
No answer | 3 | 0 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
Average score in respondents | 3.11 | 3.15 | 3.00 | 3.29 | 3.00 | 3.21 | 2.80 |
Total | Gender | Age Groups | Groups of Smartphone Owners/Non-Owners | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Males | Females | 20s–50s (Around Working Ages) | 60s and 70s | Owners | Non-Owners | ||
(5) Strongly Agree | 7 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 7 | 0 |
(4) Agree | 7 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 5 | 2 |
(3) Neutral | 5 | 2 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 1 |
(2) Disagree | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
(1) Strongly disagree | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Total of respondents | 20 | 13 | 7 | 9 | 11 | 16 | 4 |
No answer | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
Average score in respondents | 4.00 | 4.15 | 3.71 | 4.11 | 3.91 | 4.19 | 3.25 |
© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Utsu, K.; Ueta, S.; Tajima, S.; Kajita, Y.; Murakami, Y.; Uchida, O. Town-Watching Workshop Using Disaster Information Tweeting and Mapping System. Future Internet 2019, 11, 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11070150
Utsu K, Ueta S, Tajima S, Kajita Y, Murakami Y, Uchida O. Town-Watching Workshop Using Disaster Information Tweeting and Mapping System. Future Internet. 2019; 11(7):150. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11070150
Chicago/Turabian StyleUtsu, Keisuke, Shun Ueta, Sachi Tajima, Yoshitaka Kajita, Yuji Murakami, and Osamu Uchida. 2019. "Town-Watching Workshop Using Disaster Information Tweeting and Mapping System" Future Internet 11, no. 7: 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11070150
APA StyleUtsu, K., Ueta, S., Tajima, S., Kajita, Y., Murakami, Y., & Uchida, O. (2019). Town-Watching Workshop Using Disaster Information Tweeting and Mapping System. Future Internet, 11(7), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/fi11070150