Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35814809›Full record

ArticleJMIR infodemiology

The Role of Influential Actors in Fostering the Polarized COVID-19 Vaccine Discourse on Twitter: Mixed Methods of Machine Learning and Inductive Coding.

Loni Hagen, Ashley Fox, Heather O'Leary, DeAndre Dyson, Kimberly Walker, Cecile A Lengacher, Raquel Hernandez

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR infodemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
7.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Loni HagenSchool of Information University of South Florida Tampa, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6532-0852
Ashley FoxRockefeller College of Public Affairs and Policy University at Albany State University of New York Albany, NY United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4106-7853
Heather O'LearyDepartment of Anthropology University of South Florida St. Petersburg, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6664-8075
DeAndre DysonSchool of Information University of South Florida Tampa, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3765-3710
Kimberly WalkerZimmerman School of Advertising and Mass Communications University of South Florida Tampa, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2825-2694
Cecile A LengacherCollege of Nursing University of South Florida Tampa, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2700-2367
Raquel HernandezInstitute for Clinical and Translational Research Johns Hopkins All Children's Hospital St. Petersburg, FL United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0769-2770
University of South Florida · USAlbany State University · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of South Florida St. Petersburg · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Since COVID-19 vaccines became broadly available to the adult population, sharp divergences in uptake have emerged along partisan lines. Researchers have indicated a polarized social media presence contributing to the spread of mis- or disinformation as being responsible for these growing partisan gaps in uptake. Objective: The major aim of this study was to investigate the role of influential actors in the context of the community structures and discourse related to COVID-19 vaccine conversations on Twitter that emerged prior to the vaccine rollout to the general population and discuss implications for vaccine promotion and policy. Methods: We collected tweets on COVID-19 between July 1, 2020, and July 31, 2020, a time when attitudes toward the vaccines were forming but before the vaccines were widely available to the public. Using network analysis, we identified different naturally emerging Twitter communities based on their internal information sharing. A PageRank algorithm was used to quantitively measure the level of "influentialness" of Twitter accounts and identifying the "influencers," followed by coding them into different actor categories. Inductive coding was conducted to describe discourses shared in each of the 7 communities. Results: Twitter vaccine conversations were highly polarized, with different actors occupying separate "clusters." The antivaccine cluster was the most densely connected group. Among the 100 most influential actors, medical experts were outnumbered both by partisan actors and by activist vaccine skeptics or conspiracy theorists. Scientists and medical actors were largely absent from the conservative network, and antivaccine sentiment was especially salient among actors on the political right. Conversations related to COVID-19 vaccines were highly polarized along partisan lines, with "trust" in vaccines being manipulated to the political advantage of partisan actors. Conclusions: These findings are informative for designing improved vaccine information communication strategies to be delivered on social media especially by incorporating influential actors. Although polarization and echo chamber effect are not new in political conversations in social media, it was concerning to observe these in health conversations on COVID-19 vaccines during the vaccine development process.

Indexed as

COVID-19, vaccine hesitancy, social media, influential actorsinfluencerTwitter

Identifiers

PMID35814809
PMCPMC9254747
OpenAlexW4285028795

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.