The infinity vaccine war: linguistic regularities and audience engagement of vaccine debate on Twitter

IF 3.1 3区 管理学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Rachel X. Peng, R. Wang
{"title":"The infinity vaccine war: linguistic regularities and audience engagement of vaccine debate on Twitter","authors":"Rachel X. Peng, R. Wang","doi":"10.1108/oir-03-2022-0186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose As public health professionals strive to promote vaccines for inoculation efforts, fervent anti-vaccination movements are marshaling against it. This study is motived by a need to better understand the online discussion around vaccination. The authors identified the sentiments, emotions and topics of pro- and anti-vaxxers’ tweets, investigated their change since the pandemic started and further examined the associations between these content features and audiences’ engagement.Design/methodology/approach Utilizing a snowball sampling method, data were collected from the Twitter accounts of 100 pro-vaxxers (266,680 tweets) and 100 anti-vaxxers (248,425 tweets). The authors are adopting a zero-shot machine learning algorithm with a pre-trained transformer-based model for sentiment analysis and structural topic modeling to extract the topics. And the authors use the hurdle negative binomial model to test the relationships among sentiment/emotion, topics and engagement.Findings In general, pro-vaxxers used more positive tones and more emotions of joy in their tweets, while anti-vaxxers utilized more negative terms. The cues of sadness predominantly encourage retweets across the pro- and anti-vaccine corpus, while tweets amplifying the emotion of surprise are more attention-grabbing and getting more likes. Topic modeling of tweets yields the top 15 topics for pro- and anti-vaxxers separately. Among the pro-vaxxers’ tweets, the topics of “Child protection” and “COVID-19 situation” are positively predicting audiences’ engagement. For anti-vaxxers, the topics of “Supporting Trump,” “Injured children,” “COVID-19 situation,” “Media propaganda” and “Community building” are more appealing to audiences.Originality/value This study utilizes social media data and a state-of-art machine learning algorithm to generate insights into the development of emotionally appealing content and effective vaccine promotion strategies while combating coronavirus disease 2019 and moving toward a global recovery.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2022-0186","PeriodicalId":54683,"journal":{"name":"Online Information Review","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Online Information Review","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/oir-03-2022-0186","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose As public health professionals strive to promote vaccines for inoculation efforts, fervent anti-vaccination movements are marshaling against it. This study is motived by a need to better understand the online discussion around vaccination. The authors identified the sentiments, emotions and topics of pro- and anti-vaxxers’ tweets, investigated their change since the pandemic started and further examined the associations between these content features and audiences’ engagement.Design/methodology/approach Utilizing a snowball sampling method, data were collected from the Twitter accounts of 100 pro-vaxxers (266,680 tweets) and 100 anti-vaxxers (248,425 tweets). The authors are adopting a zero-shot machine learning algorithm with a pre-trained transformer-based model for sentiment analysis and structural topic modeling to extract the topics. And the authors use the hurdle negative binomial model to test the relationships among sentiment/emotion, topics and engagement.Findings In general, pro-vaxxers used more positive tones and more emotions of joy in their tweets, while anti-vaxxers utilized more negative terms. The cues of sadness predominantly encourage retweets across the pro- and anti-vaccine corpus, while tweets amplifying the emotion of surprise are more attention-grabbing and getting more likes. Topic modeling of tweets yields the top 15 topics for pro- and anti-vaxxers separately. Among the pro-vaxxers’ tweets, the topics of “Child protection” and “COVID-19 situation” are positively predicting audiences’ engagement. For anti-vaxxers, the topics of “Supporting Trump,” “Injured children,” “COVID-19 situation,” “Media propaganda” and “Community building” are more appealing to audiences.Originality/value This study utilizes social media data and a state-of-art machine learning algorithm to generate insights into the development of emotionally appealing content and effective vaccine promotion strategies while combating coronavirus disease 2019 and moving toward a global recovery.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2022-0186
无限的疫苗战争:Twitter上疫苗辩论的语言规律和受众参与
随着公共卫生专业人员努力推广疫苗接种工作,热烈的反疫苗接种运动正在集结起来反对它。这项研究的动机是需要更好地理解围绕疫苗接种的在线讨论。作者确定了支持和反对接种疫苗者的推文的情绪、情绪和主题,调查了自大流行开始以来它们的变化,并进一步研究了这些内容特征与受众参与度之间的关联。设计/方法/方法采用滚雪球抽样法,从100名支持疫苗接种者(266680条推文)和100名反对疫苗接种者(248425条推文)的Twitter账户中收集数据。作者采用零射击机器学习算法,使用预训练的基于变压器的模型进行情感分析和结构主题建模,以提取主题。作者使用障碍负二项模型来测试情绪/情绪,话题和参与度之间的关系。总的来说,支持接种疫苗的人在推特上使用了更多积极的语气和更多的喜悦情绪,而反对接种疫苗的人则使用了更多消极的词汇。悲伤的暗示主要鼓励在支持和反对疫苗的语料库中转发,而放大惊讶情绪的推文更吸引眼球,得到更多的点赞。推文的主题建模分别产生了支持和反对疫苗者的前15个主题。在支持接种者的推文中,“儿童保护”和“新冠疫情”等话题正预示着受众的参与度。对于反对接种疫苗的人来说,“支持特朗普”、“受伤儿童”、“新冠疫情”、“媒体宣传”、“社区建设”等话题更有吸引力。本研究利用社交媒体数据和最先进的机器学习算法,在抗击2019冠状病毒病和迈向全球复苏的同时,对情感上有吸引力的内容和有效的疫苗推广策略的发展产生见解。同行评议这篇文章的同行评议历史可以在https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-03-2022-0186上找到
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
Online Information Review
Online Information Review 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
16.10%
发文量
67
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The journal provides a multi-disciplinary forum for scholars from a range of fields, including information studies/iSchools, data studies, internet studies, media and communication studies and information systems. Publishes research on the social, political and ethical aspects of emergent digital information practices and platforms, and welcomes submissions that draw upon critical and socio-technical perspectives in order to address these developments. Welcomes empirical, conceptual and methodological contributions on any topics relevant to the broad field of digital information and communication, however we are particularly interested in receiving submissions that address emerging issues around the below topics. Coverage includes (but is not limited to): •Online communities, social networking and social media, including online political communication; crowdsourcing; positive computing and wellbeing. •The social drivers and implications of emerging data practices, including open data; big data; data journeys and flows; and research data management. •Digital transformations including organisations’ use of information technologies (e.g. Internet of Things and digitisation of user experience) to improve economic and social welfare, health and wellbeing, and protect the environment. •Developments in digital scholarship and the production and use of scholarly content. •Online and digital research methods, including their ethical aspects.
×
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