Public Perceptions and Discussions of Premium Cigars on Reddit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Introduction While premium cigars have similar addictive, toxic, and carcinogenic constituents as other cigars and cigarettes, about 1% of the US adults reported premium cigar use from 2010 to 2019. This study aimed to understand public perceptions and discussions of premium cigars on Reddit, one of the most popular social media platforms. Methods Using keywords such as “premium cigar”, we extracted 2,238 Reddit posts from Reddit Archive between July 2019 and June 2021. Among them, 1,626 posts were related to premium cigars. By employing the inductive approach, we manually coded each Reddit post on premium cigars to understand public perceptions and discussions of premium cigars by summarizing them into different topics and subtopics. Results Longitudinal analysis showed that the number of Reddit posts on premium cigars increased since June 2020. Content analysis showed that among Reddit posts related to premium cigars, the most popular topic is “Information sharing” (75.72%), in which Reddit users shared their perceptions about premium cigars, asked for advice, and provided some recommendations about premium cigars. Over one-quarter of posts (27.17%) are sharing user experiences of premium cigars (such as taste). Nearly one-fifth (18.99%) of posts are discussing the affordability of premium cigars. In addition, 7.87% of posts are discussing legal/policy issues related to premium cigars, and 6.82% of posts are related to the health risks of premium cigars compared to cigarettes. Conclusions Public perceptions including misperceptions, user experiences, and affordability related to premium cigars have been actively discussed on Reddit. Implications With the increasing trend of premium cigar use, it is necessary to understand how premium cigars are perceived by the public and why they are becoming more popular. This study provides the first evidence on public perceptions and discussions of premium cigars on social media, which could provide useful information on future regulatory policies that aim to prevent the prevalence of premium cigars to protect public health.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".