Examining ethno-racial attitudes of the public in Twitter discourses related to the United States Supreme Court ruling: A machine learning approach.

Otobo I Ujah, Pelumi Olaore, Onome C Nnorom, Chukwuemeka E Ogbu, Russell S Kirby
Author Information
  1. Otobo I Ujah: College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.
  2. Pelumi Olaore: College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.
  3. Onome C Nnorom: Department of Community Medicine, Jos University Teaching Hospital, Jos, Nigeria.
  4. Chukwuemeka E Ogbu: College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.
  5. Russell S Kirby: College of Public Health, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, United States.

Abstract

Background: The decision of the US Supreme Court to repeal sparked significant media attention. Although primarily related to abortion, opinions are divided about how this decision would impact disparities, especially for Black, Indigenous, and people of color. We used advanced natural language processing (NLP) techniques to examine ethno-racial contents in Twitter discourses related to the overturn of .
Methods: We screened approximately 3 million tweets posted to discussions and identified unique tweets in English-language that had mentions related to race, ethnicity, and racism posted between June 24 and July 10, 2022. We performed lexicon-based sentiment analysis to identify sentiment polarity and the emotions expressed in the Twitter discourse and conducted structural topic modeling to identify and examine latent themes.
Results: Of the tweets retrieved, 0.7% (= 23,044) had mentions related to race, ethnicity, and racism. The overall sentiment polarity was negative (mean = -0.41, SD = 1.48). Approximately 60.0% (= 12,092) expressed negative sentiments, while 39.0% (= 81,45) expressed positive sentiments, and 3.0% (= 619) expressed neutral sentiments. There were 20 latent themes which emerged from the topic model. The predominant topics in the discourses were related to "racial resentment" (topic 2, 11.3%), "human rights" (topic 2, 7.9%), and "socioeconomic disadvantage" (topic 16, 7.4%).
Conclusions: Our study demonstrates wide ranging ethno-racial concerns following the reversal of and supports the need for active surveillance of racial and ethnic disparities in abortion access in the post- era.

Keywords

References

  1. J Med Ethics. 2022 Dec;48(12):952-956 [PMID: 36180204]
  2. Demography. 2021 Dec 1;58(6):2019-2028 [PMID: 34693444]
  3. Contraception. 2020 Jun;101(6):376-383 [PMID: 32032641]
  4. PLoS One. 2014 Aug 01;9(8):e103408 [PMID: 25084530]
  5. Am J Public Health. 2017 Jan;107(1):e1-e8 [PMID: 27854532]
  6. Reprod Health Matters. 2008 May;16(31 Suppl):99-107 [PMID: 18772090]
  7. Sci Rep. 2022 Jun 2;12(1):9163 [PMID: 35654806]
  8. Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Nov 29;10(12): [PMID: 36553914]
  9. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Jun;224(6):597.e1-597.e14 [PMID: 33309562]
  10. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020 Nov 11;6(4):e21978 [PMID: 33108310]
  11. Womens Health Issues. 2022 Jan-Feb;32(1):9-19 [PMID: 34711498]
  12. Soc Sci Med. 2022 Dec;315:115547 [PMID: 36427479]
  13. Am J Bioeth. 2022 Aug;22(8):3-15 [PMID: 35652910]
  14. Biosci Trends. 2022 Dec 26;16(6):455-458 [PMID: 36450578]
  15. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Jun;54(2):54-63 [PMID: 35442569]
  16. Sex Reprod Healthc. 2022 Mar;31:100689 [PMID: 34933171]
  17. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Oct 22;21(1):1139 [PMID: 34686197]
  18. PLoS One. 2022 Feb 17;17(2):e0263787 [PMID: 35176059]
  19. Contraception. 2017 Dec;96(6):388-394 [PMID: 28867441]
  20. Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Nov 1;140(5):729-737 [PMID: 35947856]
  21. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2022 Dec;30(1):2135574 [PMID: 36383177]
  22. Contraception. 2015 Mar;91(3):226-33 [PMID: 25537853]
  23. Linacre Q. 2016 Feb;83(1):20-25 [PMID: 27833179]
  24. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2022 Dec;54(4):166-176 [PMID: 36254620]
  25. Obstet Gynecol. 2022 Oct 1;140(4):557-559 [PMID: 35861359]
  26. Syst Rev. 2021 Jun 28;10(1):192 [PMID: 34183064]
  27. Soc Sci Res. 2022 Nov;108:102784 [PMID: 36334929]
  28. J Comput Soc Sci. 2023 Apr;6(1):165-190 [PMID: 38249661]
  29. Humanit Soc Sci Commun. 2022;9(1):367 [PMID: 36254165]
  30. Health Educ Behav. 2022 Dec;49(6):924-928 [PMID: 36173003]
  31. Reprod Health. 2022 Aug 24;19(1):184 [PMID: 36002861]
  32. Sex Reprod Health Matters. 2022 Dec;30(1):2129686 [PMID: 36368036]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0relatedtopicsentimentexpressedethno-racialTwitterdiscoursestweetsraceethnicityracism0%sentimentsdecisionSupremeCourtmediaabortiondisparitiesnaturallanguageprocessingexamine3postedmentionsanalysisidentifypolaritystructuralmodelinglatentthemesnegative27Background:USrepealsparkedsignificantattentionAlthoughprimarilyopinionsdividedimpactespeciallyBlackIndigenouspeoplecolorusedadvancedNLPtechniquescontentsoverturnMethods:screenedapproximatelymilliondiscussionsidentifieduniqueEnglish-languageJune24July102022performedlexicon-basedemotionsdiscourseconductedResults:retrieved07%= 23044overallmean = -041SD = 148Approximately60= 1209239= 8145positive= 619neutral20emergedmodelpredominanttopics"racialresentment"113%"humanrights"9%"socioeconomicdisadvantage"164%Conclusions:studydemonstrateswiderangingconcernsfollowingreversalsupportsneedactivesurveillanceracialethnicaccesspost-eraExaminingattitudespublicUnitedStatesruling:machinelearningapproachRoevsWadesocial

Similar Articles

Cited By