ArticlePloS one2021
Anatomy into the battle of supporting or opposing reopening amid the COVID-19 pandemic on Twitter: A temporal and spatial analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of the evolving factors of social media users' emotions and behaviors: a longitudinal study from China's COVID-19 opening policy period.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Public Health Policy, Political Ideology, and Public Emotion Related to COVID-19 in the U.S.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Topic and Trend Analysis of Weibo Discussions About COVID-19 Medications Before and After China's Exit from the Zero-COVID Policy: Retrospective Infoveillance Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Article
- Do you hear the people sing? Comparison of synchronized URL and narrative themes in 2020 and 2023 French protests.Frontiers in big data · 2023Article
- Using geospatial social media data for infectious disease studies: a systematic review.International journal of digital earth · 2023Article
- How has airport service quality changed in the context of COVID-19: A data-driven crowdsourcing approach based on sentiment analysis.Journal of air transport management · 2022Article
- A cross-country analysis of macroeconomic responses to COVID-19 pandemic using Twitter sentiments.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Reopening amid the COVID-19 pandemic has triggered a battle on social media. The supporters perceived that the lockdown policy could damage the economy and exacerbate social inequality. By contrast, the opponents believed it was necessary to contain the spread and ensure a safe environment for recovery. Anatomy into the battle is of importance to address public concerns, beliefs, and values, thereby enabling policymakers to determine the appropriate solutions to implement reopening policy. To this end, we investigated over 1.5 million related Twitter postings from April 17 to May 30, 2020. With the aid of natural language processing (NLP) techniques and machine learning classifiers, we classified each tweet into either a "supporting" or "opposing" class and then investigated the public perception from temporal and spatial perspectives. From the temporal dimension, we found that both political and scientific news that were extensively discussed on Twitter led to the perception of opposing reopening. Further, being the first mover with full reopen adversely affected the public reaction to reopening policy, while being the follower or late mover resulted in positive responses. From the spatial dimension, the correlation and regression analyses suggest that the state-level perception was very likely to be associated with political affiliation and health value.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.