ArticleFrontiers in nutrition2026
Framing resonance and variation in social media: the case of slow food on Instagram.
Article in Frontiers in nutrition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sustainability-oriented social movement organisations (SMOs) and actors collaborating with them use social media to share messages that reflect or vary the SMO's collective action frames (CAFs). Framing differences can shape public perception, potentially weakening movement identity, support, and influence. Limited research analysing multiple actors spreading SMO's frames has neglected to study the role of corporations. Using the social movement theory's framing perspective, this study addresses these gaps by examining 83,310 English-language posts containing the hashtag #slowfood on Instagram in 2025. Applying network analysis, community detection, and statistical measures, the analysis identified seven frames. Three resonant frames include a prognostic frame on traditional/anti-industrial food production and consumption, a prognostic/motivational frame on local and sustainable food production and consumption, and a prognostic frame on ecological and domestic gardening. Four frame variations with undetermined functions relate to platform-mediated and commercialised food culture consumption, healthy and comfort eating linked to dietary restrictions, everyday/tourist food-related practices, and hedonic and refined consumption of wine. No frames related to nutritional aspects of food were identified. Surprisingly, commercial actors contribute to the spread of both resonant and divergent frames. The groups most likely to influence users with their frames are Slow Food (resonant), followed by Agricultural/Farm (resonant) and Hospitality (variation) companies, due to their high "latent frame influence" scores. These findings advance research on digital food information and social movement theory's framing perspective by analysing how corporations and other actors spread Slow Food-related frames on Instagram and by introducing the concept of "latent frame influence". Methodologically, the study contributes to the quantitative and statistical analysis of large-scale global social media data in sustainability-oriented SMO framing research.
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.