MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392621496 · doi:10.2196/49608

Advocating for Older Adults in the Age of Social Media: Strategies to Achieve Peak Engagement on Twitter

2024· article· en· W4392621496 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Reuben Ng, Nicole Indran, Luyao Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Aging · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSocial mediaGerontologyPsychologySocial engagementInternet privacySociologyMedia studiesComputer scienceMedicineWorld Wide WebSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Over the last decade, many organizations dedicated to serving the needs and interests of older adults have turned to social media platforms, such as Twitter, subsequently rebranded X, to improve the visibility of age-related issues. However, notwithstanding their growing digital presence and participation, minimal attention has been paid to the use of social media among these advocacy groups. To achieve policy change, advocacy organizations must first be able to engage and mobilize audiences. Objective: Our study aims to elucidate how different tweet features affect the time it takes for posts uploaded by age advocacy organizations to reach peak engagement. Methods: We collated 204,905 tweets from 53 age advocacy organizations posted over a 12-year period. The engagement score of each tweet was calculated by combining well-established metrics, namely likes, retweets, quote tweets, and replies. We ran Cox models with tweet features as predictors and time-to-peak engagement as the outcome. "Peak engagement" (event) refers to engagement scores above the 75th percentile, and "time" refers to months taken to reach peak engagement per tweet. Results: Approximately 1 in 2 tweets (n=103,068, 50.3%) had either no hashtags or just 1 hashtag. Around two-thirds (n=131,220, 64%) of the tweets included a URL. Visual information was highly underused, with most tweets not including GIFs (n=204,202, 99.7%), videos (n=199,800, 97.5%), or photos (n=143,844, 70.2%). Roughly half (n=101,470, 49.5%) of the tweets contained mentions and 9.3% (n=19,009) of tweets were replies. Only 4.5% (n=9285) of tweets were quote tweets. Most tweets were uploaded in the afternoon (n=86,004, 42%) and on a weekday (n=180,499, 88.1%). As hypothesized, features associated with peak engagement were the inclusion of visual elements like photos, which increased peak engagement by 3 times (P<.001), and the use of 3 or more hashtags (P<.001). Quote tweets increased engagement by 3 times (P<.001), as compared to regular tweets, controlling for account-level covariates. Tweets from organizations with a higher tweet volume were 40% less likely to reach peak engagement (P<.001). Conclusions: Social media as a networked platform has the potential to reach users on a global scale and at an exponential speed. Having uncovered the features that are more likely to reach peak engagement on Twitter, our study serves as an invaluable resource for age advocacy organizations in their movement to create a more age-inclusive world.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.319 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR AgingSame topicTechnology Use by Older AdultsFrench-language works237,207