Twitter Voices: Twitter Users’ Sentiments and Emotions About COVID-19 Vaccination within the United States

Samuel J. Lin, V. Bustos, C. Comer, Samuel M. Manstein, Elizabeth Laikhter, Eric Shiah, Helen Xun, Bernard T Lee
{"title":"Twitter Voices: Twitter Users’ Sentiments and Emotions About COVID-19 Vaccination within the United States","authors":"Samuel J. Lin, V. Bustos, C. Comer, Samuel M. Manstein, Elizabeth Laikhter, Eric Shiah, Helen Xun, Bernard T Lee","doi":"10.21601/ejeph/11499","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has negatively impacted society as a whole. Vaccination became the only reliable solution to overcome the severity of this pandemic. A critical factor to achieve an adequate vaccination coverage is by improving public confidence in immunization. Social media plays an important role in reflecting public perception towards certain topics, such as COVID-19 vaccination. This study aims to evaluate U.S. Twitter users ’ sentiments and emotions towards COVID-19 vaccination, and the changes experienced before and after vaccine rollout. Methods: COVID-19 vaccine related tweets were collected from Twitter ’ s Application Programming Interface. We analyzed tweets from March 11, 2020, to May 17, 2021, and divide them into two groups; before and after the first vaccine was implemented in the U.S. Sentiment analysis, negative binomial regression and linear regression models were used for inferential analysis. Results: A total of 19,654 tweets were extracted. From those, 10,374 and 9,280 tweets were posted before and after COVID-19 vaccine was launched in U.S., respectively. A statistically significant difference was evidenced between the two groups when comparing each individual emotion, and positive and negative sentiments, except for joy. Lastly, a statistically significant increase of the sentiment score in the post COVID-19 vaccine group compared to the pre COVID-19 vaccine group was evidenced. Conclusion: Our findings evidenced that public perception of the COVID-19 vaccine has positively changed over time and suggest that the terms “ trials ” and “ vaccination ” , which were associated to trust, could potentially be used to create targeted educational and promotional schemes to achieve a better vaccination coverage rate.","PeriodicalId":72973,"journal":{"name":"European journal of environment and public health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of environment and public health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21601/ejeph/11499","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Introduction: The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has negatively impacted society as a whole. Vaccination became the only reliable solution to overcome the severity of this pandemic. A critical factor to achieve an adequate vaccination coverage is by improving public confidence in immunization. Social media plays an important role in reflecting public perception towards certain topics, such as COVID-19 vaccination. This study aims to evaluate U.S. Twitter users ’ sentiments and emotions towards COVID-19 vaccination, and the changes experienced before and after vaccine rollout. Methods: COVID-19 vaccine related tweets were collected from Twitter ’ s Application Programming Interface. We analyzed tweets from March 11, 2020, to May 17, 2021, and divide them into two groups; before and after the first vaccine was implemented in the U.S. Sentiment analysis, negative binomial regression and linear regression models were used for inferential analysis. Results: A total of 19,654 tweets were extracted. From those, 10,374 and 9,280 tweets were posted before and after COVID-19 vaccine was launched in U.S., respectively. A statistically significant difference was evidenced between the two groups when comparing each individual emotion, and positive and negative sentiments, except for joy. Lastly, a statistically significant increase of the sentiment score in the post COVID-19 vaccine group compared to the pre COVID-19 vaccine group was evidenced. Conclusion: Our findings evidenced that public perception of the COVID-19 vaccine has positively changed over time and suggest that the terms “ trials ” and “ vaccination ” , which were associated to trust, could potentially be used to create targeted educational and promotional schemes to achieve a better vaccination coverage rate.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
推特之声:推特用户对美国新冠肺炎疫苗接种的感受和情绪
2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)对整个社会产生了负面影响。疫苗接种成为克服这次大流行严重性的唯一可靠解决办法。实现充分疫苗接种覆盖率的一个关键因素是提高公众对免疫接种的信心。社交媒体在反映公众对某些话题(如COVID-19疫苗接种)的看法方面发挥着重要作用。这项研究旨在评估美国推特用户对COVID-19疫苗接种的情绪和情绪,以及疫苗推出前后的变化。方法:收集Twitter应用程序编程接口中与COVID-19疫苗相关的推文。我们分析了2020年3月11日至2021年5月17日的推文,并将其分为两组;采用情绪分析、负二项回归和线性回归模型进行推理分析。结果:共提取了19654条tweets。其中,在美国推出新冠病毒疫苗前后,分别发布了10374条和9280条推文。两组人在比较每一种情绪、积极情绪和消极情绪(除了快乐)时,都有统计学上的显著差异。最后,与接种新冠病毒疫苗前相比,接种新冠病毒疫苗后组的情绪得分有统计学意义的提高。结论:我们的研究结果证明,随着时间的推移,公众对COVID-19疫苗的看法发生了积极的变化,并表明“试验”和“疫苗接种”这两个与信任相关的术语可能被用来制定有针对性的教育和宣传计划,以实现更高的疫苗接种覆盖率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The role of ACE2 cause of death between COVID-19 and various complications Defluoridation of drinking water by using low cost point of use treatment technologies: A review Exploring medical students’ perspectives on online education in medical education Understanding depression and suicide rates in the UK in comparison to Pakistan Life-event-induced changes in daily routines: Their association with the manifestation of dysphoric emotions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1