Exploring Sentiment, Values, and Misinformation Surrounding Vaccination Legislation on Twitter: A Case Study of California's Passage of SB277.

IF 3 3区 医学 Q1 COMMUNICATION
Lourdes S Martinez, Matthew W Savage, David M Williams, Jennifer Alvarado, Christian Cordon-Mulbry, Destiny Dickerson, Regine Roquia, Brian H Spitzberg, Michael Peddecord, Elias Issa, Ming-Hsiang Tsou
{"title":"Exploring Sentiment, Values, and Misinformation Surrounding Vaccination Legislation on Twitter: A Case Study of California's Passage of SB277.","authors":"Lourdes S Martinez, Matthew W Savage, David M Williams, Jennifer Alvarado, Christian Cordon-Mulbry, Destiny Dickerson, Regine Roquia, Brian H Spitzberg, Michael Peddecord, Elias Issa, Ming-Hsiang Tsou","doi":"10.1080/10410236.2024.2432066","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>California remains among a handful of U.S. states with no clause for a personal belief exemption for required vaccines due to passage of SB277. As vaccines represent an important tool in the public health arsenal against SARS-CoV-2 and may yet be required by schools and employers, other states may consider enacting laws similar to SB277 to address COVID-19 and future outbreaks of infectious diseases. In this case study of California's SB277 bill, we examine the sentiment, values, and misinformation shared on Twitter regarding this bill in the days leading up to, during, and after its successful enactment into law in 2015 using a sample of geocoded tweets (<i>N</i> = 1,000). Results of our content analysis of tweet sentiments before and after the law was signed offer evidence for significant differences in vaccine misinformation [<i>χ</i><sup><i>2</i></sup>(1, <i>N</i> = 1,000) = 4.01, <i>p</i> = .045, <i>Φ</i> = .06], and individual values related to power [<i>χ</i><sup><i>2</i></sup>(1, <i>N</i> = 1,000) = 71.57, <i>p</i> < .001, <i>Φ</i> = -.27] and achievement [<i>χ</i><sup><i>2</i></sup>(1, <i>N</i> = 1,000) = 4.39, <i>p</i> = .036, <i>Φ</i> = .07]. Findings suggest that although most tweets did not contain misinformation, few provided scientific evidence to back claims. Implication for theory, research, and health policy and practice are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":12889,"journal":{"name":"Health Communication","volume":" ","pages":"1-16"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Communication","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2024.2432066","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

California remains among a handful of U.S. states with no clause for a personal belief exemption for required vaccines due to passage of SB277. As vaccines represent an important tool in the public health arsenal against SARS-CoV-2 and may yet be required by schools and employers, other states may consider enacting laws similar to SB277 to address COVID-19 and future outbreaks of infectious diseases. In this case study of California's SB277 bill, we examine the sentiment, values, and misinformation shared on Twitter regarding this bill in the days leading up to, during, and after its successful enactment into law in 2015 using a sample of geocoded tweets (N = 1,000). Results of our content analysis of tweet sentiments before and after the law was signed offer evidence for significant differences in vaccine misinformation [χ2(1, N = 1,000) = 4.01, p = .045, Φ = .06], and individual values related to power [χ2(1, N = 1,000) = 71.57, p < .001, Φ = -.27] and achievement [χ2(1, N = 1,000) = 4.39, p = .036, Φ = .07]. Findings suggest that although most tweets did not contain misinformation, few provided scientific evidence to back claims. Implication for theory, research, and health policy and practice are discussed.

在推特上探索围绕疫苗接种立法的情绪、价值观和错误信息:以加州通过SB277为例。
由于SB277法案的通过,加州仍然是美国少数几个没有个人信仰豁免条款的州之一。由于疫苗是对抗SARS-CoV-2的公共卫生武器库中的重要工具,学校和雇主可能还需要疫苗,其他州可能会考虑制定类似于SB277的法律,以应对COVID-19和未来传染病的爆发。在加州SB277法案的案例研究中,我们使用地理编码的推文样本(N = 1000),研究了在2015年该法案成功颁布之前、期间和之后的几天里,推特上关于该法案的情绪、价值观和错误信息。我们对法律签署前后推文情绪的内容分析结果表明,疫苗错误信息存在显著差异[χ2(1, N = 1000) = 4.01, p =。045, Φ =。与幂相关的个体值[χ2(1, N = 1000) = 71.57, p Φ = -]。27)和成就(χ2 (N = 1000) = 4.39, p =。[36, Φ = .07]。研究结果表明,尽管大多数推文不包含错误信息,但很少有科学证据支持这些说法。讨论了对理论、研究和卫生政策与实践的启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
10.30%
发文量
184
期刊介绍: As an outlet for scholarly intercourse between medical and social sciences, this noteworthy journal seeks to improve practical communication between caregivers and patients and between institutions and the public. Outstanding editorial board members and contributors from both medical and social science arenas collaborate to meet the challenges inherent in this goal. Although most inclusions are data-based, the journal also publishes pedagogical, methodological, theoretical, and applied articles using both quantitative or qualitative methods.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信