ArticlePloS one2024
A cross-cultural examination of temporal orientation through everyday language on social media.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Dynamic monitoring of public opinion on fertility intentions: based on the intersection of empirical and social media perspectives.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Past research has shown that culture can form and shape our temporal orientation-the relative emphasis on the past, present, or future. However, there are mixed findings on how temporal orientations vary between North American and East Asian cultures due to the limitations of survey methodology and sampling. In this study, we applied an inductive approach and leveraged big data and natural language processing between two popular social media platforms-Twitter and Weibo-to assess the similarities and differences in temporal orientation in the United States of America and China, respectively. We first established predictive models from annotation data and used them to classify a larger set of English Twitter sentences (NTW = 1,549,136) and a larger set of Chinese Weibo sentences (NWB = 95,181) into four temporal catetories-past, future, atemporal present, and temporal present. Results show that there is no significant difference between Twitter and Weibo on past or future orientations; the large temporal orientation difference between North Americans and Chinese derives from their different prevailing focus on atemporal (e.g., facts, ideas) present (Twitter) or temporal present (e.g., the "here" and "now") (Weibo). Our findings contribute to the debate on cultural differences in temporal orientations with new perspectives following a new methodological approach. The study's implications call for a reevaluation of how temporal orientation is measured in cross-cultural studies, emphasizing the use of large-scale language data and acknowledging the atemporal present category. Understanding temporal orientations can guide effective cross-cultural communication strategies to tailor approaches for different audience based on temporal orientations, enhancing intercultural understanding and engagement.
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.