研究文化对 COVID-19 预防措施在线立场的影响及其对发病率和死亡率的影响:推文的全球立场检测分析

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Wen Shan , Jovan Chew Yu Quan , Zhengkui Wang , Anurag Sharma , Aik Beng Ng , Simon See
{"title":"研究文化对 COVID-19 预防措施在线立场的影响及其对发病率和死亡率的影响:推文的全球立场检测分析","authors":"Wen Shan ,&nbsp;Jovan Chew Yu Quan ,&nbsp;Zhengkui Wang ,&nbsp;Anurag Sharma ,&nbsp;Aik Beng Ng ,&nbsp;Simon See","doi":"10.1016/j.ssmph.2024.101679","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, nations implemented various preventive measures, triggering varying online responses. This study examines cultural influences on public online stances toward these measures and their impacts on COVID-19 cases/deaths. Stance detection analysis was used to analyze 16,428,557 Tweets regarding COVID-19 preventive measures from 95 countries, selected based on Hofstede's cultural dimensions. To ensure the variety of population, countries were chosen based on Twitter data availability and a minimum sample size of 385 tweets, achieving a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error. The weighted regression analysis revealed that the relationship between culture and online stances depends on the cultural congruence of each measure. Specifically, power distance positively predicted stances for all measures, while indulgence had a negative effect overall. Effects of other cultural indices varied across measures. Individualism negatively affected face coverings stances. Uncertainty avoidance influenced lockdown and vaccination stances negatively but had a positive effect on social distancing stances. Long-term orientation negatively affected lockdown and social distancing stances but positively influenced quarantine stances. Cultural tightness only negatively affected face coverings and quarantine stances. Online stances toward face coverings mediated the relationship between cultural indices and COVID-19 cases/deaths. As such, public health officials should consider cultural profiles and use culturally congruent communication strategies when implementing preventive measures for future pandemics. Furthermore, leveraging digital tools is vital in navigating and shaping online stances to enhance the effectiveness of these measures.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47780,"journal":{"name":"Ssm-Population Health","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 101679"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827324000806/pdfft?md5=c241ae3cbed3d743fd71895bda5daeb3&pid=1-s2.0-S2352827324000806-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Examining the cultural influence on online stances towards COVID-19 preventive measures and their impact on incidence and mortality: A global stance detection analysis of tweets\",\"authors\":\"Wen Shan ,&nbsp;Jovan Chew Yu Quan ,&nbsp;Zhengkui Wang ,&nbsp;Anurag Sharma ,&nbsp;Aik Beng Ng ,&nbsp;Simon See\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ssmph.2024.101679\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>During the COVID-19 pandemic, nations implemented various preventive measures, triggering varying online responses. This study examines cultural influences on public online stances toward these measures and their impacts on COVID-19 cases/deaths. Stance detection analysis was used to analyze 16,428,557 Tweets regarding COVID-19 preventive measures from 95 countries, selected based on Hofstede's cultural dimensions. To ensure the variety of population, countries were chosen based on Twitter data availability and a minimum sample size of 385 tweets, achieving a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error. The weighted regression analysis revealed that the relationship between culture and online stances depends on the cultural congruence of each measure. Specifically, power distance positively predicted stances for all measures, while indulgence had a negative effect overall. Effects of other cultural indices varied across measures. Individualism negatively affected face coverings stances. Uncertainty avoidance influenced lockdown and vaccination stances negatively but had a positive effect on social distancing stances. Long-term orientation negatively affected lockdown and social distancing stances but positively influenced quarantine stances. Cultural tightness only negatively affected face coverings and quarantine stances. Online stances toward face coverings mediated the relationship between cultural indices and COVID-19 cases/deaths. As such, public health officials should consider cultural profiles and use culturally congruent communication strategies when implementing preventive measures for future pandemics. Furthermore, leveraging digital tools is vital in navigating and shaping online stances to enhance the effectiveness of these measures.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47780,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ssm-Population Health\",\"volume\":\"26 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101679\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827324000806/pdfft?md5=c241ae3cbed3d743fd71895bda5daeb3&pid=1-s2.0-S2352827324000806-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ssm-Population Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827324000806\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ssm-Population Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352827324000806","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在 COVID-19 大流行期间,各国实施了各种预防措施,引发了不同的网络反应。本研究探讨了公众在网上对这些措施所持立场的文化影响及其对 COVID-19 病例/死亡人数的影响。根据霍夫斯泰德(Hofstede)的文化维度选择了 95 个国家的 16,428,557 条有关 COVID-19 预防措施的推文,采用了立场检测分析法进行分析。为确保人群的多样性,根据推特数据的可用性选择国家,最小样本量为 385 条推文,置信度为 95%,误差范围为 5%。加权回归分析表明,文化与网络立场之间的关系取决于各测量指标的文化一致性。具体来说,权力距离对所有衡量标准的立场都有正向预测作用,而纵容则总体上有负向影响。其他文化指数对不同测量结果的影响也不尽相同。个人主义对遮盖面部的立场有负面影响。不确定性规避对封锁和疫苗接种立场有负面影响,但对社会疏远立场有正面影响。长期取向对封锁和社会疏远立场有负面影响,但对检疫立场有正面影响。文化严密性只对面部覆盖和检疫立场产生负面影响。对遮盖面部的在线立场对文化指数与 COVID-19 病例/死亡之间的关系起到了中介作用。因此,公共卫生官员在为未来的流行病实施预防措施时,应考虑文化特征并使用与文化相一致的沟通策略。此外,利用数字工具对于引导和塑造网络立场以提高这些措施的有效性至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Examining the cultural influence on online stances towards COVID-19 preventive measures and their impact on incidence and mortality: A global stance detection analysis of tweets

During the COVID-19 pandemic, nations implemented various preventive measures, triggering varying online responses. This study examines cultural influences on public online stances toward these measures and their impacts on COVID-19 cases/deaths. Stance detection analysis was used to analyze 16,428,557 Tweets regarding COVID-19 preventive measures from 95 countries, selected based on Hofstede's cultural dimensions. To ensure the variety of population, countries were chosen based on Twitter data availability and a minimum sample size of 385 tweets, achieving a 95% confidence level with a 5% margin of error. The weighted regression analysis revealed that the relationship between culture and online stances depends on the cultural congruence of each measure. Specifically, power distance positively predicted stances for all measures, while indulgence had a negative effect overall. Effects of other cultural indices varied across measures. Individualism negatively affected face coverings stances. Uncertainty avoidance influenced lockdown and vaccination stances negatively but had a positive effect on social distancing stances. Long-term orientation negatively affected lockdown and social distancing stances but positively influenced quarantine stances. Cultural tightness only negatively affected face coverings and quarantine stances. Online stances toward face coverings mediated the relationship between cultural indices and COVID-19 cases/deaths. As such, public health officials should consider cultural profiles and use culturally congruent communication strategies when implementing preventive measures for future pandemics. Furthermore, leveraging digital tools is vital in navigating and shaping online stances to enhance the effectiveness of these measures.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ssm-Population Health
Ssm-Population Health PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.10%
发文量
298
审稿时长
101 days
期刊介绍: SSM - Population Health. The new online only, open access, peer reviewed journal in all areas relating Social Science research to population health. SSM - Population Health shares the same Editors-in Chief and general approach to manuscripts as its sister journal, Social Science & Medicine. The journal takes a broad approach to the field especially welcoming interdisciplinary papers from across the Social Sciences and allied areas. SSM - Population Health offers an alternative outlet for work which might not be considered, or is classed as ''out of scope'' elsewhere, and prioritizes fast peer review and publication to the benefit of authors and readers. The journal welcomes all types of paper from traditional primary research articles, replication studies, short communications, methodological studies, instrument validation, opinion pieces, literature reviews, etc. SSM - Population Health also offers the opportunity to publish special issues or sections to reflect current interest and research in topical or developing areas. The journal fully supports authors wanting to present their research in an innovative fashion though the use of multimedia formats.
×
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