Social Media, Sentiments and Political Discourse – An Exploratory Study of the 2021 Canadian Federal Election
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social media are widely used for online political discourse. Opinions shared on social media have different sentiments associated with them. Given the very high adoption rates of X (formerly known as Twitter) among adults, those who share their opinions on X not only represent a sizable segment of the society, but also influence (through emotion contagion) an even larger segment who are passive (non-contributing) users of the platform. Furthermore, the discourse that is initiated on X typically spreads to other more traditional media. As a result, X is influential, which makes it useful to understand the factors related to the sentiments expressed in tweets. Such understanding can help policymakers to take actions that align with public needs and priorities. This research focuses on identifying the drivers (keywords) of sentiments associated with political discourse on X. We also explore virality, i.e., how much a message (the tweet) spreads, and the relationship between sentiments and virality. Finally, we explore whether the clustering of tweets among sentiment and virality groups can improve the potential of social media content for predicting election results. Sentiment Analysis of 764,000 tweets related to the 2021 Canadian Federal election was followed by text clustering to identify sentiment-driving topics. We found some keywords predominantly present within a positive or negative sentiment that are suggestive of entities or ideas to invest in or mitigate by political decision makers. We were also able to find partial evidence for “negativity bias” by detecting a negative relationship between sentiment (positivity) and virality (number of retweets). Finally, we demonstrated that high positivity on the political discourse does not reflect election outcomes and examining X content in more neutral groups can improve predictive power. Our findings have implications for political decision makers and social media analytics researchers.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".