Public Perception of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Twitter: Sentiment Analysis and Topic Modeling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 is a scientifically and medically novel disease that is not fully understood because it has yet to be consistently and deeply studied. Among the gaps in research on the COVID-19 outbreak, there is a lack of sufficient infoveillance data. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to increase understanding of public awareness of COVID-19 pandemic trends and uncover meaningful themes of concern posted by Twitter users in the English language during the pandemic. METHODS: Data mining was conducted on Twitter to collect a total of 107,990 tweets related to COVID-19 between December 13 and March 9, 2020. The analyses included frequency of keywords, sentiment analysis, and topic modeling to identify and explore discussion topics over time. A natural language processing approach and the latent Dirichlet allocation algorithm were used to identify the most common tweet topics as well as to categorize clusters and identify themes based on the keyword analysis. RESULTS: The results indicate three main aspects of public awareness and concern regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. First, the trend of the spread and symptoms of COVID-19 can be divided into three stages. Second, the results of the sentiment analysis showed that people have a negative outlook toward COVID-19. Third, based on topic modeling, the themes relating to COVID-19 and the outbreak were divided into three categories: the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, how to control COVID-19, and reports on COVID-19. CONCLUSIONS: Sentiment analysis and topic modeling can produce useful information about the trends in the discussion of the COVID-19 pandemic on social media as well as alternative perspectives to investigate the COVID-19 crisis, which has created considerable public awareness. This study shows that Twitter is a good communication channel for understanding both public concern and public awareness about COVID-19. These findings can help health departments communicate information to alleviate specific public concerns about the disease.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".