MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409985521 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3566014

Voices of People With Disabilities: Integrating Topic Modeling and Sentiment Analysis to Study Disability Discourse on Social Media

2025· article· en· W4409985521 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersUniversity of SaskatchewanPennsylvania State University
KeywordsSocial mediaSentiment analysisComputer scienceSocial model of disabilityNatural language processingWorld Wide WebPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

People with Disability (PwD) are some of society’s marginalized and vulnerable groups. They are mostly disadvantaged because accessibility to communal structures and social services remains challenging. Sometimes, PwDs are misunderstood because not all disabilities are visible or outward, which makes it difficult to implement useful interventions for them. Thus, the voices of PwDs, as expressed freely on social media must be studied to understand better the fundamental challenges they face. In this research, we analyze the comments expressed in Disability communities on Reddit in the last 5 years (from 2019 to 2024) to uncover the concerns and sentiments of PwDs. Comments were collected through the Reddit API from 4 Disability subreddits, namely r/ADHD, r/Blind, r/deaf, and r/disability. Overall, a total of 601,215 comments were extracted for analysis. We applied topic modeling algorithms, namely Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), Non-negative Matrix Factorization (NMF), and two variations of BERTopic (BERTopic with K-means clustering and BERTopic with HDBSCAN clustering) on each subreddit’s comments to extract hidden topics. The NMF discovered 15 topics in the r/Blind and 20 topics in the r/deaf. Furthermore, related topics were merged into themes, and we discovered 9 themes in both r/ADHD and r/Blind, 8 themes in r/deaf, and 7 themes in r/disability. Additionally, a pre-trained transformer, SiEBERT, was used to determine the sentiments for the themes in each subreddit. The themes discovered across at least 2 subreddits are Mobility, Diagnosis, Education, Assistive and Accessible Technology, Support, Disability Accommodations, and Relations. PwD with ADHD struggle with the effects of medications, household chores, sleep, attention span, and oversubscribing to online payment services. The PwD who are visually impaired feel alienated by society, struggle with public transit systems, have limited employment, and experience harassment. Those with difficulty hearing express difficulty with hearing devices, educational materials, technological challenges, limited workplace accommodations, and bad treatment from people. Our research discussed the themes and provided recommendations where applicable.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.068
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.386 · 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