An Analysis of the Prevalence and Trends in Drug-Related Lyrics on Twitter (X): Quantitative Approach
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The pervasiveness of drug culture has become evident in popular music and social media. Previous research has examined drug abuse content in both social media and popular music; however, to our knowledge, the intersection of drug abuse content in these 2 domains has not been explored. To address the ongoing drug epidemic, we analyzed drug-related content on Twitter (subsequently rebranded X), with a specific focus on lyrics. Our study provides a novel finding on the prevalence of drug abuse by defining a new subcategory of X content: "tweets that reference established drug lyrics." OBJECTIVE: We aim to investigate drug trends in popular music on X, identify and classify popular drugs, and analyze related artists' gender, genre, and popularity. Based on the collected data, our goal is to create a prediction model for future drug trends and gain a deeper understanding of the characteristics of users who cite drug lyrics on X. METHODS: X data were collected from 2015 to 2017 through the X streaming application programming interface (API). Drug lyrics were obtained from the Genius lyrics database using the Genius API based on drug keywords. The Smith-Waterman text-matching algorithm is used to detect the drug lyrics in posts. We identified famous drugs in lyrics that were posted. Consequently, the analysis was extended to related artists, songs, genres, and popularity on X. The frequency of drug-related lyrics on X was aggregated into a time-series, which was then used to create prediction models using linear regression, Facebook Prophet, and NIXTLA TimeGPT-1. In addition, we analyzed the number of followers of users posting drug-related lyrics to explore user characteristics. RESULTS: We analyzed over 1.97 billion publicly available posts from 2015 to 2017, identifying more than 157 million that matched drug-related keywords. Of these, 150,746 posts referenced drug-related lyrics. Cannabinoids, opioids, stimulants, and hallucinogens were the most cited drugs in lyrics on X. Rap and hip-hop dominated, with 91.98% of drug-related lyrics from these genres and 84.21% performed by male artists. Predictions from all 3 models, linear regression, Facebook Prophet, and NIXTLA TimeGPT-1, indicate a slight decline in the prevalence of drug-related lyrics on X over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed 2 significant findings. First, we identified a previously unexamined subset of drug-related content on X: drug lyrics, which could play a critical role in models predicting the surge in drug-related incidents. Second, we demonstrated the use of cutting-edge time-series forecasting tools, including Facebook Prophet and NIXTLA TimeGPT-1, in accurately predicting these trends. These insights contribute to our understanding of how social media shapes public behavior and sentiment toward drug use.
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 | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,006 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 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 ».