Social Media Opinions on Working From Home in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Since March 2020, companies nationwide have started work from home (WFH) owing to the rapid increase of confirmed COVID-19 cases in an attempt to help prevent the disease from spreading and to rescue the economy from the pandemic. Many organizations have conducted surveys to understand people's opinions toward WFH. However, the findings are limited owing to a small sample size and the dynamic topics over time. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to understand public opinions regarding WFH in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a large-scale social media study using Twitter data to portray different groups of individuals who have positive or negative opinions on WFH. We performed an ordinary least squares regression analysis to investigate the relationship between the sentiment about WFH and user characteristics including gender, age, ethnicity, median household income, and population density. To better understand the public opinion, we used latent Dirichlet allocation to extract topics and investigate how tweet contents are related to people's attitude. RESULTS: On performing ordinary least squares regression analysis using a large-scale data set of publicly available Twitter posts (n=28,579) regarding WFH during April 10-22, 2020, we found that the sentiment on WFH varies across user characteristics. In particular, women tend to be more positive about WFH (P<.001). People in their 40s are more positive toward WFH than those in other age groups (P<.001). People from high-income areas are more likely to have positive opinions about WFH (P<.001). These nuanced differences are supported by a more fine-grained topic analysis. At a higher level, we found that the most negative sentiment about WFH roughly corresponds to the discussion on government policy. However, people express a more positive sentiment when discussing topics on "remote work or study" and "encouragement." Furthermore, topic distributions vary across different user groups. Women pay more attention to family activities than men (P<.05). Older people talk more about work and express a more positive sentiment regarding WFH. CONCLUSIONS: This paper presents a large-scale social media-based study to understand the public opinion on WFH in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hope that this study can contribute to policymaking both at the national and institution or company levels to improve the overall population's experience with WFH.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".