Using Twitter to Detect Psychological Characteristics of Self-Identified Persons With Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Feasibility Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: More than 3.5 million Americans live with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). Major challenges persist in diagnosing ASD as no medical test exists to diagnose this disorder. Digital phenotyping holds promise to guide in the clinical diagnoses and screening of ASD. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the feasibility of using the Web-based social media platform Twitter to detect psychological and behavioral characteristics of self-identified persons with ASD. METHODS: Data from Twitter were retrieved from 152 self-identified users with ASD and 182 randomly selected control users from March 22, 2012 to July 20, 2017. We conducted a between-group comparative textual analysis of tweets about repetitive and obsessive-compulsive behavioral characteristics typically associated with ASD. In addition, common emotional characteristics of persons with ASD, such as fear, paranoia, and anxiety, were examined between groups through textual analysis. Furthermore, we compared the timing of tweets between users with ASD and control users to identify patterns in communication. RESULTS: Users with ASD posted a significantly higher frequency of tweets related to the specific repetitive behavior of counting compared with control users (P<.001). The textual analysis of obsessive-compulsive behavioral characteristics, such as fixate, excessive, and concern, were significantly higher among users with ASD compared with the control group (P<.001). In addition, emotional terms related to fear, paranoia, and anxiety were tweeted at a significantly higher rate among users with ASD compared with control users (P<.001). Users with ASD posted a smaller proportion of tweets during time intervals of 00:00-05:59 (P<.001), 06:00-11:59 (P<.001), and 18:00-23.59 (P<.001), as well as a greater proportion of tweets from 12:00 to 17:59 (P<.001) compared with control users. CONCLUSIONS: Social media may be a valuable resource for observing unique psychological characteristics of self-identified persons with ASD. Collecting and analyzing data from these digital platforms may afford opportunities to identify the characteristics of ASD and assist in the diagnosis or verification of ASD. This study highlights the feasibility of leveraging digital data for gaining new insights into various health conditions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".