ArticlePloS one2022
Fluctuations of psychological states on Twitter before and during COVID-19.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Exploring mental health literacy among information technology (IT) professionals: Twitter content analysis.PLOS digital health · 2025Article
- A Social Media Study of Portrayals of Bipolar Disorders on YouTube: Content and Thematic Analyses.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- A thematic analysis of what Australians state would change their minds on climate change.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Using YouTube Comments Data to Explore Postpartum Depression in Social Media: An Infodemiology Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Article
- Neurotrophic effects of intermittent fasting, calorie restriction and exercise: a review and annotated bibliography.Frontiers in aging · 2023Review
- Associations between emotions expressed in internet news and subsequent emotional content on twitter.Heliyon · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has been repeatedly associated with poor mental health. Previous studies have mostly focused on short time frames such as around the first lockdown periods, and the majority of research is based on self-report questionnaires. Less is known about the fluctuations of psychological states over longer time frames across the pandemic. Twitter timelines of 4,735 users from London and New York were investigated to shed light on potential fluctuations of several psychological states and constructs related to the pandemic. Moving averages are presented for the years 2020 and 2019. Further, mixed negative binomial regression models were fitted to estimate monthly word counts for the time before and during the pandemic. Several psychological states and constructs fluctuated heavily on Twitter during 2020 but not during 2019. Substantial increases in levels of sadness, anxiety, anger, and concerns about home and health were observed around the first lockdown periods in both cities. The levels of most constructs decreased after the initial spike, but negative emotions such as sadness, anxiety, and anger remained elevated throughout 2020 compared to the year prior to the pandemic. Tweets from both cities showed remarkably similar temporal patterns, and there are similarities to reactions found on Twitter following other previous traumatic events.
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.