{"title":"Quantitative Textual Analysis as a means to explore corporate interests in food safety.","authors":"Corina L Vasilescu, Martin McKee, Aaron Reeves","doi":"10.1177/13634593231173807","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The growing body of scholarship on the commercial determinants of health has, so far, mostly employed qualitative methods but this is now being complemented by a small, yet growing, corpus of quantitative studies. We illustrate the use of one such method, quantitative text analysis (QTA), in a case study of submissions to a public consultation on a draft scientific opinion by the European Food Safety Authority on the chemical acrylamide, demonstrating how this method can be used and insights that might be drawn from it. We use Wordscores as one example of QTA to illuminate the diverse positions taken by actors submitting comments and then assess whether the final policy documents moved towards or away from the positions taken by different stakeholders. We find a broadly uniform position among the public health community, opposed to acrylamide, contrasting with industry positions that were not monolithic. Some firms recommended major amendments to the guidance, largely reflecting the impact on their practices, while policy innovators seeking ways to reduce acrylamide in foods aligned with the public health community. We also find no clear movement in the policy guidance, likely because most submissions supported the draft document. Many governments are required to conduct public consultations, some attracting enormous numbers of responses, with little guidance on how best to synthesise the responses so the default position is often a count of those for and against. We argue that QTA, primarily a research tool, might usefully be applied in analysing public consultation responses to understand better the positions taken by different actors.</p>","PeriodicalId":12944,"journal":{"name":"Health","volume":" ","pages":"372-389"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13634593231173807","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The growing body of scholarship on the commercial determinants of health has, so far, mostly employed qualitative methods but this is now being complemented by a small, yet growing, corpus of quantitative studies. We illustrate the use of one such method, quantitative text analysis (QTA), in a case study of submissions to a public consultation on a draft scientific opinion by the European Food Safety Authority on the chemical acrylamide, demonstrating how this method can be used and insights that might be drawn from it. We use Wordscores as one example of QTA to illuminate the diverse positions taken by actors submitting comments and then assess whether the final policy documents moved towards or away from the positions taken by different stakeholders. We find a broadly uniform position among the public health community, opposed to acrylamide, contrasting with industry positions that were not monolithic. Some firms recommended major amendments to the guidance, largely reflecting the impact on their practices, while policy innovators seeking ways to reduce acrylamide in foods aligned with the public health community. We also find no clear movement in the policy guidance, likely because most submissions supported the draft document. Many governments are required to conduct public consultations, some attracting enormous numbers of responses, with little guidance on how best to synthesise the responses so the default position is often a count of those for and against. We argue that QTA, primarily a research tool, might usefully be applied in analysing public consultation responses to understand better the positions taken by different actors.
期刊介绍:
Health: is published four times per year and attempts in each number to offer a mix of articles that inform or that provoke debate. The readership of the journal is wide and drawn from different disciplines and from workers both inside and outside the health care professions. Widely abstracted, Health: ensures authors an extensive and informed readership for their work. It also seeks to offer authors as short a delay as possible between submission and publication. Most articles are reviewed within 4-6 weeks of submission and those accepted are published within a year of that decision.