Improving Public Health Policy by Comparing the Public Response during the Start of COVID-19 and Monkeypox on Twitter in Germany: A Mixed Methods Study
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Sample
2.2. Methodology
2.3. Data Analysis
3. Results
Meta-Themes and Comparison
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Worldometer. COVID Live—Coronavirus Statistics—Worldometer. Available online: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ (accessed on 1 September 2022).
- Boon-Itt, S.; Skunkan, Y. Public Perception of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Twitter: Sentiment Analysis and Topic Modeling Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020, 6, e21978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Edo-Osagie, O.; De La Iglesia, B.; Lake, I.; Edeghere, O. A scoping review of the use of Twitter for public health research. Comput. Biol. Med. 2020, 122, 103770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nuzzo, J.B.; Borio, L.L.; Gostin, L.O. The WHO declaration of monkeypox as a global public health emergency. JAMA 2022, 328, 615–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, J. Monkeypox outbreak questions intensify as cases soar. Science 2022, 376, 902–903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coccia, M. COVID-19 vaccination is not a sufficient public policy to face crisis management of next pandemic threats. Public Organ. Rev. 2022, 17, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sallam, M. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy worldwide: A concise systematic review of vaccine acceptance rates. Vaccines 2021, 9, 160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alassad, M.; Agarwal, N. Contextualizing focal structure analysis in social networks. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 2022, 12, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blandi, L.; Sabbatucci, M.; Dallagiacoma, G.; Alberti, F.; Bertuccio, P.; Odone, A. Digital information approach through social media among Gen Z and Millennials: The global scenario during the COVID-19 pandemic. Vaccines 2022, 10, 1822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stracqualursi, L.; Agati, P. Tweet topics and sentiments relating to distance learning among Italian Twitter users. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 9163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xue, J.; Chen, J.; Hu, R.; Chen, C.; Zheng, C.; Su, Y.; Zhu, T. Twitter discussions and emotions about the COVID-19 pandemic: Machine learning approach. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020, 22, e20550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, R.; Shrivastava, P.; Kapoor, A.; Tiwari, A.; Mittal, A. Social media analysis with AI: Sentiment analysis techniques for the analysis of twitter COVID-19 data. Crit. Rev. 2020, 7, 2761–2774. [Google Scholar]
- Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Clarke, V.; Braun, V.; Hayfield, N. Thematic analysis. In Qualitative Psychology: A Practical Guide to Research Methods; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2015; Volume 222, p. 248. [Google Scholar]
- Coker, D.C. Making thematic analysis systematic: The seven deadly sins. J. Stud. Educ. 2021, 11, 126–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fereday, J.; Muir-Cochrane, E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2006, 5, 80–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ivankova, N.V.; Creswell, J.W.; Stick, S.L. Using mixed-methods sequential explanatory design: From theory to practice. Field Methods 2006, 18, 3–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haven, L.T.; Van Grootel, D.L. Preregistering qualitative research. Account. Res. 2019, 26, 229–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Huberman, M.; Miles, M.B. The Qualitative Researcher’s Companion; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Anderson, C. Presenting and evaluating qualitative research. Am. J. Pharm. Educ. 2010, 74, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Coccia, M. Effects of strict containment policies on COVID-19 pandemic crisis: Lessons to cope with next pandemic impacts. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coccia, M. Pandemic prevention: Lessons from COVID-19. Encyclopedia 2021, 1, 433–444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogbuokiri, B.; Ahmadi, A.; Bragazzi, N.L.; Nia, Z.M.; Mellado, B.; Wu, J.; Orbinski, J.; Asgary, A.; Kong, J. Public sentiments toward COVID-19 vaccines in South African cities: An analysis of Twitter posts. Front. Public Health 2022, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qorib, M.; Oladunni, T.; Denis, M.; Ososanya, E.; Cotae, P. COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Text mining, sentiment analysis and machine learning on COVID-19 vaccination twitter dataset. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 212, 118715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Semeraro, A.; Vilella, S.; Ruffo, G.; Stella, M. Emotional profiling and cognitive networks unravel how mainstream and alternative press framed AstraZeneca, Pfizer and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chowdhury, T.; Chowdhury, H.; Bontempi, E.; Coccia, M.; Masrur, H.; Sait, S.M.; Senjyu, T. Are mega-events super spreaders of infectious diseases similar to COVID-19? A look into Tokyo 2020 Olympics and Paralympics to improve preparedness of next international events. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coccia, M. Optimal levels of vaccination to reduce COVID-19 infected individuals and deaths: A global analysis. Environ. Res. 2022, 204, 112314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thelwall, M.; Thelwall, S. A thematic analysis of highly retweeted early COVID-19 tweets: Consensus, information, dissent and lockdown life. Aslib J. Inf. Manag. 2020, 72, 945–962. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mubarak, H.; Hassan, S. Arcorona: Analyzing arabic tweets in the early days of coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2012.01462. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, L.; Fu, Y. Study on the mechanism of public attention to a major event: The outbreak of COVID-19 in China. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2022, 81, 103811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hosseini, P.; Hosseini, P.; Broniatowski, D. Content Analysis of Persian/Farsi Tweets during COVID-19 Pandemic in Iran Using NLP. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on NLP for COVID-19 (Part 2) at EMNLP 2020; Association for Computational Linguistics: Seattle, WA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Leelawat, N.; Tang, J.; Saengtabtim, K.; Laosunthara, A. Trends of tweets on the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. J. Disaster Res. 2020, 15, 530–533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chandrasekaran, R.; Mehta, V.; Valkunde, T.; Moustakas, E. Topics, Trends, and Sentiments of Tweets about the COVID-19 Pandemic: Temporal Infoveillance Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2020, 22, e22624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chintalapudi, N.; Battineni, G.; Amenta, F. Sentimental analysis of COVID-19 tweets using deep learning models. Infect. Dis. Rep. 2021, 13, 329–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ortiz-Martínez, Y.; Sarmiento, J.; Bonilla-Aldana, D.K.; Rodríguez-Morales, A.J. Monkeypox goes viral: Measuring the misinformation outbreak on Twitter. J. Infect. Dev. Ctries. 2022, 16, 1218–1220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jahanbin, K.; Jokar, M.; Rahmanian, V. Using twitter and web news mining to predict the monkeypox outbreak. Asian Pac. J. Trop. Med. 2022, 15, 236. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, Q.X.; Yau, C.E.; Lim, Y.L.; Wong, L.K.; Liew, T.M. Public sentiment on the global outbreak of monkeypox: An unsupervised machine learning analysis of 352,182 twitter posts. Public Health 2022, 213, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sv, P.; Ittamalla, R. What concerns the general public the most about monkeypox virus?—A text analytics study based on Natural Language Processing (NLP). Travel Med. Infect. Dis. 2022, 49, 102404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thomas, E.E.; Stornaiuolo, A. Restorying the self: Bending toward textual justice. Harv. Educ. Rev. 2016, 86, 313–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kar, N.; Kar, B.; Kar, S. Stress and coping during COVID-19 pandemic: Result of an online survey. Psychiatry Res. 2021, 295, 113598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krakowczyk, J.B.; Planert, J.; Skoda, E.M.; Dinse, H.; Kaup, T.; Teufel, M.; Bäuerle, A. Pandemic fatigue, psychopathological risk factors, and vaccination attitudes during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021—A network analysis. J. Affect. Disord. Rep. 2022, 8, 100345. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Panayiotou, G.; Panteli, M.; Leonidou, C. Coping with the invisible enemy: The role of emotion regulation and awareness in quality of life during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Context. Behav. Sci. 2021, 19, 17–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, R.G.; Van Der Boor, C. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and initial period of lockdown on the mental health and well-being of adults in the UK. BJPsych Open 2020, 6, e90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haktanir, A.; Can, N.; Seki, T.; Kurnaz, M.F.; Dilmaç, B. Do we experience pandemic fatigue? Current state, predictors, and prevention. Curr. Psychol. 2022, 41, 7314–7325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Tammemi, A.B.; Tarhini, Z.; Akour, A. A swaying between successive pandemic waves and pandemic fatigue: Where does Jordan stand? Ann. Med. Surg. 2021, 65, 102298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Connor, D.B.; Thayer, J.F.; Vedhara, K. Stress and health: A review of psychobiological processes. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2021, 72, 663–688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skulmowski, A.; Standl, B. COVID-19 information fatigue? A case study of a German university website during two waves of the pandemic. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2021, 3, 350–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Widmann, T. Fear, Hope, and COVID-19: Emotional Elite Rhetoric and Its Impact on the Public during the First Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Political Psychol. 2022, 43, 827–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shoaib, H.M. The influence of visual risk communication on community during the COVID-19 pandemic: An investigation of Twitter platform. In The Implementation of Smart Technologies for Business Success and Sustainability; Springer: Cham, Switzerland; New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 349–364. [Google Scholar]
- Mansi, B.A.; Clark, J.; David, F.S.; Gesell, T.M.; Glasser, S.; Gonzalez, J.; Haller, D.G.; Laine, C.; Miller, C.L.; Mooney, L.A.; et al. Ten recommendations for closing the credibility gap in reporting industry-sponsored clinical research: A joint journal and pharmaceutical industry perspective. Mayo Clin. Proc. 2012, 87, 424–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kim, K.; King, K.W.; Kim, J. Processing contradictory brand information from advertising and social media: An application of the multiple-motive heuristic-systematic model. J. Mark. Commun. 2018, 24, 801–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ecker, U.K.H.; Lewandowsky, S.; Cook, J.; Schmid, P.; Fazio, L.K.; Brashier, N.; Kendeou, P.; Vraga, E.K.; Amazeen, M.A. The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 2022, 1, 13–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zimbres, T.M.; Bell, R.A.; Miller, L.M.S.; Zhang, J. When media health stories conflict: Test of the contradictory health information processing (CHIP) model. J. Health Commun. 2021, 26, 460–472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, M.; Wang, R.; Chan-Olmsted, S. Factors affecting YouTube influencer marketing credibility: A heuristic-systematic model. J. Media Bus. Stud. 2018, 15, 188–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dörner, D.; Schaub, H. Errors in planning and decision-making and the nature of human information processing. Appl. Psychol. 1994, 43, 433–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arbane, M.; Benlamri, R.; Brik, Y.; Alahmar, A.D. Social media-based COVID-19 sentiment classification model using Bi-LSTM. Expert Syst. Appl. 2023, 212, 118710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Coccia, M. Comparative critical decisions in management. In Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance; Springer Nature Switzerland AG: Cham, Switzerland, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Brownson, R.C.; Burke, T.A.; Colditz, G.A.; Samet, J.M. Reimagining public health in the aftermath of a pandemic. Am. J. Public Health 2020, 110, 1605–1610. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerretsen, P.; Kim, J.; Caravaggio, F.; Quilty, L.; Sanches, M.; Wells, S.; Brown, E.E.; Agic, B.; Pollock, B.G.; Graff-Guerrero, A. Individual determinants of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0258462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Benati, I.; Coccia, M. Global analysis of timely COVID-19 vaccinations: Improving governance to reinforce response policies for pandemic crises. Int. J. Health Gov. 2022, 27, 240–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Step | Process |
---|---|
1. Pre-binning | Developing nascent categories by reading, annotating, applying machine learning, and keyword analysis |
2. Binning | Coding and categorization of tweets into bins by topic and trends, checked by machine learning |
3. Thematizing | Sorting and checking of categories into elements, dimensions, and themes |
4. Post-binning | Checking and reconciling themes within each theme, across themes, and with the data |
5. Reporting | Comparing and contrasting results and producing a narrative |
Type | COVID-19 | Monkeypox |
---|---|---|
Major themes | personal effects local spread outlook on impending crisis | vaccinations questioning science global spread political actions |
Minor themes | humor advertisements past crises | humor homosexual spread/concerns low death rate |
Topics | COVID-19: Selfing | Monkeypox: Othering |
---|---|---|
Reporting Cases | Proximity. Cases are reported worldwide but strongly focus on one’s country and community. | Distal. Cases focused on global issues, with one’s country and community a minor issue. |
Deaths | Alarm. The death rate increased, and it came closer to home. | Rare. Deaths were infrequent and marginalized as a concern. |
Protective Measures | Personal Ripple. The evolution of protective measures (quarantines, stay at home orders, social distancing, etc.) affected everyone. | In the News. There were no protective measures, and monkeypox was elsewhere. Vaccines meant there was a low risk. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
AL-Ahdal, T.; Coker, D.; Awad, H.; Reda, A.; Żuratyński, P.; Khailaie, S. Improving Public Health Policy by Comparing the Public Response during the Start of COVID-19 and Monkeypox on Twitter in Germany: A Mixed Methods Study. Vaccines 2022, 10, 1985. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10121985
AL-Ahdal T, Coker D, Awad H, Reda A, Żuratyński P, Khailaie S. Improving Public Health Policy by Comparing the Public Response during the Start of COVID-19 and Monkeypox on Twitter in Germany: A Mixed Methods Study. Vaccines. 2022; 10(12):1985. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10121985
Chicago/Turabian StyleAL-Ahdal, Tareq, David Coker, Hamzeh Awad, Abdullah Reda, Przemysław Żuratyński, and Sahamoddin Khailaie. 2022. "Improving Public Health Policy by Comparing the Public Response during the Start of COVID-19 and Monkeypox on Twitter in Germany: A Mixed Methods Study" Vaccines 10, no. 12: 1985. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10121985
APA StyleAL-Ahdal, T., Coker, D., Awad, H., Reda, A., Żuratyński, P., & Khailaie, S. (2022). Improving Public Health Policy by Comparing the Public Response during the Start of COVID-19 and Monkeypox on Twitter in Germany: A Mixed Methods Study. Vaccines, 10(12), 1985. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines10121985