Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON.
School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University, Ottawa, ON.
Can J Diet Pract Res. 2021 Jun 1;82(2):79-83. doi: 10.3148/cjdpr-2020-035. Epub 2020 Dec 15.
To date, most qualitative knowledge about individual eating patterns and the food environment has been derived from traditional data collection methods, such as interviews, focus groups, and observations. However, there currently exists a large source of nutrition-related data in social media discussions that have the potential to provide opportunities to improve dietetic research and practice. Qualitative social media discussion analysis offers a new tool for dietetic researchers and practitioners to gather insights into how the public discusses various nutrition-related topics. We first consider how social media discussion data come with significant advantages including low-cost access to timely ways to gather insights from the public, while also cautioning that social media data have limitations (e.g., difficulty verifying demographic information). We then outline 3 types of social media discussion platforms in particular: () online news article comment sections, () food and nutrition blogs, and () discussion forums. We discuss how each different type of social media offers unique insights and provide a specific example from our own research using each platform. We contend that social media discussions can contribute positively to dietetic research and practice.
迄今为止,大多数关于个体饮食模式和食物环境的定性知识都是从传统的数据收集方法中得出的,例如访谈、焦点小组和观察。然而,社交媒体讨论中目前存在大量与营养相关的数据,这有可能为改善饮食研究和实践提供机会。定性社交媒体讨论分析为饮食学家研究人员和从业人员提供了一种新工具,可深入了解公众如何讨论各种营养相关主题。我们首先考虑社交媒体讨论数据带来的显著优势,包括以低成本即时获取公众见解的便捷方式,同时也提醒注意社交媒体数据的局限性(例如,难以核实人口统计信息)。然后,我们概述了 3 种特定类型的社交媒体讨论平台:() 在线新闻文章评论部分,() 食品和营养博客,以及() 讨论论坛。我们讨论了每种不同类型的社交媒体如何提供独特的见解,并提供了我们使用每个平台进行的自己研究的具体示例。我们认为,社交媒体讨论可以为饮食学研究和实践做出积极贡献。