文献检索文档翻译深度研究
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
邀请有礼套餐&价格历史记录

新学期,新优惠

限时优惠:9月1日-9月22日

30天高级会员仅需29元

1天体验卡首发特惠仅需5.99元

了解详情
不再提醒
插件&应用
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
高级版
套餐订阅购买积分包
AI 工具
文献检索文档翻译深度研究
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2025

支持和反对公共卫生政策的推文:对芝加哥公共卫生部电子烟推特活动的回应

Tweeting for and against public health policy: response to the Chicago Department of Public Health's electronic cigarette Twitter campaign.

作者信息

Harris Jenine K, Moreland-Russell Sarah, Choucair Bechara, Mansour Raed, Staub Mackenzie, Simmons Kendall

机构信息

Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, United States.

出版信息

J Med Internet Res. 2014 Oct 16;16(10):e238. doi: 10.2196/jmir.3622.


DOI:10.2196/jmir.3622
PMID:25320863
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4210950/
Abstract

BACKGROUND: In January 2014, the Chicago City Council scheduled a vote on local regulation of electronic cigarettes as tobacco products. One week prior to the vote, the Chicago Department of Public Health (CDPH) released a series of messages about electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) through its Twitter account. Shortly after the messages, or tweets, were released, the department's Twitter account became the target of a "Twitter bomb" by Twitter users sending more than 600 tweets in one week against the proposed regulation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to examine the messages and tweet patterns in the social media response to the CDPH e-cigarette campaign. METHODS: We collected all tweets mentioning the CDPH in the week between the e-cigarette campaign and the vote on the new local e-cigarette policy. We conducted a content analysis of the tweets, used descriptive statistics to examine characteristics of involved Twitter users, and used network visualization and descriptive statistics to identify Twitter users prominent in the conversation. RESULTS: Of the 683 tweets mentioning CDPH during the week, 609 (89.2%) were anti-policy. More than half of anti-policy tweets were about use of electronic cigarettes for cessation as a healthier alternative to combustible cigarettes (358/609, 58.8%). Just over one-third of anti-policy tweets asserted that the health department was lying or disseminating propaganda (224/609, 36.8%). Approximately 14% (96/683, 14.1%) of the tweets used an account or included elements consistent with "astroturfing"-a strategy employed to promote a false sense of consensus around an idea. Few Twitter users were from the Chicago area; Twitter users from Chicago were significantly more likely than expected to tweet in support of the policy. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings may assist public health organizations to anticipate, recognize, and respond to coordinated social media campaigns.

摘要

背景:2014年1月,芝加哥市议会计划就将电子烟作为烟草制品进行地方监管进行投票。在投票前一周,芝加哥公共卫生部(CDPH)通过其推特账户发布了一系列关于电子烟的信息。这些信息,即推文发布后不久,该部门的推特账户成为推特用户“推特炸弹”的目标,这些用户在一周内发送了600多条推文反对这项拟议的监管规定。 目的:我们研究的目的是检查社交媒体对CDPH电子烟宣传活动的回应中的信息和推文模式。 方法:我们收集了在电子烟宣传活动和新的地方电子烟政策投票之间的一周内提及CDPH的所有推文。我们对推文进行了内容分析,使用描述性统计来检查参与的推特用户的特征,并使用网络可视化和描述性统计来识别在对话中突出的推特用户。 结果:在这一周内提及CDPH的683条推文中,609条(89.2%)是反政策的。超过一半的反政策推文是关于使用电子烟戒烟作为比可燃香烟更健康的选择(358/609,58.8%)。略多于三分之一的反政策推文声称卫生部门在说谎或传播宣传内容(224/609,36.8%)。大约14%(96/683,14.1%)的推文使用了一个账户或包含与“人造草皮”一致的元素——一种用于围绕一个想法营造虚假共识感的策略。很少有推特用户来自芝加哥地区;来自芝加哥的推特用户发推文支持该政策的可能性明显高于预期。 结论:我们的研究结果可能有助于公共卫生组织预测、识别和应对协调一致的社交媒体活动。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/91b6/4210950/ea15cef3e449/jmir_v16i10e238_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/91b6/4210950/70ca2a6d2986/jmir_v16i10e238_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/91b6/4210950/ea15cef3e449/jmir_v16i10e238_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/91b6/4210950/70ca2a6d2986/jmir_v16i10e238_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/91b6/4210950/ea15cef3e449/jmir_v16i10e238_fig2.jpg

相似文献

[1]
Tweeting for and against public health policy: response to the Chicago Department of Public Health's electronic cigarette Twitter campaign.

J Med Internet Res. 2014-10-16

[2]
E-Cigarette Advocates on Twitter: Content Analysis of Vaping-Related Tweets.

JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020-10-14

[3]
Examining Twitter Discourse on Electronic Cigarette and Tobacco Consumption During National Cancer Prevention Month in 2018: Topic Modeling and Geospatial Analysis.

J Med Internet Res. 2021-12-29

[4]
A cross-sectional examination of marketing of electronic cigarettes on Twitter.

Tob Control. 2014-7

[5]
Social Listening: A Content Analysis of E-Cigarette Discussions on Twitter.

J Med Internet Res. 2015-10-27

[6]
Public Reactions to the New York State Policy on Flavored Electronic Cigarettes on Twitter: Observational Study.

JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2022-2-3

[7]
E-Cigarette Promotion on Twitter in Australia: Content Analysis of Tweets.

JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020-11-5

[8]
Tweeting about public health policy: Social media response to the UK Government's announcement of a Parliamentary vote on draft standardised packaging regulations.

PLoS One. 2019-2-26

[9]
Using Twitter Data to Gain Insights into E-cigarette Marketing and Locations of Use: An Infoveillance Study.

J Med Internet Res. 2015-11-6

[10]
Campaigns and counter campaigns: reactions on Twitter to e-cigarette education.

Tob Control. 2017-3

引用本文的文献

[1]
Tweeted, Trolled, Twisted: Battling for Narrative Control in E-Cigarette Use Prevention Campaigns (2014-2020).

J Health Commun. 2025-3-28

[2]
Tobacco control policies discussed on social media: a scoping review.

Tob Control. 2024-10-26

[3]
Discussion of Heated Tobacco Products on Twitter Following IQOS's Modified-Risk Tobacco Product Authorization and US Import Ban: Content Analysis.

J Med Internet Res. 2024-10-24

[4]
Characterizing Anti-Vaping Posts for Effective Communication on Instagram Using Multimodal Deep Learning.

Nicotine Tob Res. 2024-2-15

[5]
Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS), Marginalized Populations, and Tobacco Regulatory Policies.

J Lung Health Dis. 2023

[6]
Twitter Sentiment About the US Federal Tobacco 21 Law: Mixed Methods Analysis.

JMIR Form Res. 2023-8-31

[7]
Exploring communication by public health leaders and organizations during the pandemic: a content analysis of COVID-related tweets.

Can J Public Health. 2023-8

[8]
Social Media Data Mining of Antitobacco Campaign Messages: Machine Learning Analysis of Facebook Posts.

J Med Internet Res. 2023-2-13

[9]
Examining the association between California tobacco licensed retail density and public support or opposition to state anti-tobacco legislation.

Tob Prev Cessat. 2023-1-20

[10]
An Analysis of Twitter Posts About the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Menthol Ban.

Nicotine Tob Res. 2023-4-6

本文引用的文献

[1]
Exposure to electronic cigarette television advertisements among youth and young adults.

Pediatrics. 2014-6-2

[2]
Carbonyl compounds in electronic cigarette vapors: effects of nicotine solvent and battery output voltage.

Nicotine Tob Res. 2014-10

[3]
Candy flavorings in tobacco.

N Engl J Med. 2014-6-5

[4]
The impact of electronic cigarettes on the paediatric population.

Tob Control. 2014-5

[5]
Electronic cigarettes: human health effects.

Tob Control. 2014-5

[6]
Electronic cigarettes in the USA: a summary of available toxicology data and suggestions for the future.

Tob Control. 2014-5

[7]
Chemical evaluation of electronic cigarettes.

Tob Control. 2014-5

[8]
E-cigarette advertising expenditures in the U.S., 2011-2012.

Am J Prev Med. 2014-4

[9]
Electronic cigarettes and conventional cigarette use among U.S. adolescents: a cross-sectional study.

JAMA Pediatr. 2014-7

[10]
Are health behavior change interventions that use online social networks effective? A systematic review.

J Med Internet Res. 2014-2-14

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

推荐工具

医学文档翻译智能文献检索