Twitter Sentiment About the US Federal Tobacco 21 Law: Mixed Methods Analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: On December 20, 2019, the US "Tobacco 21" law raised the minimum legal sales age of tobacco products to 21 years. Initial research suggests that misinformation about Tobacco 21 circulated via news sources on Twitter and that sentiment about the law was associated with particular types of tobacco products and included discussions about other age-related behaviors. However, underlying themes about this sentiment as well as temporal trends leading up to enactment of the law have not been explored. OBJECTIVE: This study sought to examine (1) sentiment (pro-, anti-, and neutral policy) about Tobacco 21 on Twitter and (2) volume patterns (number of tweets) of Twitter discussions leading up to the enactment of the federal law. METHODS: We collected tweets related to Tobacco 21 posted between September 4, 2019, and December 31, 2019. A 2% subsample of tweets (4628/231,447) was annotated by 2 experienced, trained coders for policy-related information and sentiment. To do this, a codebook was developed using an inductive procedure that outlined the operational definitions and examples for the human coders to annotate sentiment (pro-, anti-, and neutral policy). Following the annotation of the data, the researchers used a thematic analysis to determine emergent themes per sentiment category. The data were then annotated again to capture frequencies of emergent themes. Concurrently, we examined trends in the volume of Tobacco 21-related tweets (weekly rhythms and total number of tweets over the time data were collected) and analyzed the qualitative discussions occurring at those peak times. RESULTS: The most prevalent category of tweets related to Tobacco 21 was neutral policy (514/1113, 46.2%), followed by antipolicy (432/1113, 38.8%); 167 of 1113 (15%) were propolicy or supportive of the law. Key themes identified among neutral tweets were news reports and discussion of political figures, parties, or government involvement in general. Most discussions were generated from news sources and surfaced in the final days before enactment. Tweets opposing Tobacco 21 mentioned that the law was unfair to young audiences who were addicted to nicotine and were skeptical of the law's efficacy and importance. Methods used to evade the law were found to be represented in both neutral and antipolicy tweets. Propolicy tweets focused on the protection of youth and described the law as a sensible regulatory approach rather than a complete ban of all products or flavored products. Four spikes in daily volume were noted, 2 of which corresponded with political speeches and 2 with the preparation and passage of the legislation. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding themes of public sentiment-as well as when Twitter activity is most active-will help public health professionals to optimize health promotion activities to increase community readiness and respond to enforcement needs including education for retailers and the general public.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,023 | 0,060 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».