Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36778104›Full record

ArticleSocial sciences & humanities open2023

Contrasting semantic and sentimental features between Chinese and American economic news discourse in the epidemic era: A corpus-based critical discourse analysis.

Luanying Li, Fei Gao

Abstract readNews
In one paragraph

Article in Social sciences & humanities open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Luanying LiFaculty of Social Sciences, University of Macau, Macau SAR, China.
Fei GaoInstitute of Modern Languages and Linguistics, Fudan University, Shanghai, 200433, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID -19 pandemic, as a global health emergency, has attracted a great deal of attention from the international community. In this context, China attaches great importance to economic development and news coverage because the economy concerns people's interests, while media coverage of the economy plays a crucial role in influencing citizens' attitudes and even social stability. While researchers from different disciplines are studying the epidemic, such as education, mental health, and vaccines, existing research into the media discourse of COVID-19 is limited, especially regarding its semantic and sentimental features, and it remains unclear whether the coverage of media news in different countries would draw on varying lenses. To this end, this study constructed a corpus of Chinese and American news reports from January 2020 to August 2021 and analyzed the meaning, lexicality, affective polarity, and theme extraction. Our results suggested that the mainstream media in China and the United States show opposite attitudes toward the same economic situation in China. Further, we interpreted this discrepancy in light of the "explanation" component of Fairclough's three-dimensional model. Such inconsistencies could relate to the differences in cultural backgrounds, modes of operation, and news philosophies between the two countries. Thus, by using a corpus-based approach combined with critical discourse analysis (CDA), our study not only broadens the scope of news discourse analysis, but also advances our understandings of the semantic and sentimental features of news coverage during COVID-19 and the possible reasons behind the differences between countries from a more macro perspective.

Indexed as

COVID-19Critical discourse analysisEconomic newsNews coverageThree-dimensional model

Identifiers

PMID36778104
PMCPMC9904540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.