Project description:This study explored the Korean media's framing of COVID-19 and its impact on people's support for the government. A disaster such as a public health crisis has political consequences. COVID-19 is no exception. However, the direction of the effect is not easily determined. To properly understand this phenomenon, it is necessary to analyze how the media frames the crisis. Using Structural Topic Model, this study examines the Korean media's framing of COVID-19 and especially pays attention to international comparative framing. Based on our analysis results, we argue that expanded framing, which compared the quarantine performance of Korea and other countries, induced a positive change in people's attitudes toward the government, leading to a major political victory for the ruling party in the legislative election. Our research not only identifies the impact of international comparative framing on government support but also contributes to the development of methods for measuring media framing utilizing topic modeling methods.
Project description:Doctors and nurses in these weeks and months are busy in the trenches, fighting against a new invisible enemy: Covid-19. Cities are locked down and civilians are besieged in their own homes, to prevent the spreading of the virus. War-related terminology is commonly used to frame the discourse around epidemics and diseases. The discourse around the current epidemic makes use of war-related metaphors too, not only in public discourse and in the media, but also in the tweets written by non-experts of mass communication. We hereby present an analysis of the discourse around #Covid-19, based on a large corpus tweets posted on Twitter during March and April 2020. Using topic modelling we first analyze the topics around which the discourse can be classified. Then, we show that the WAR framing is used to talk about specific topics, such as the virus treatment, but not others, such as the effects of social distancing on the population. We then measure and compare the popularity of the WAR frame to three alternative figurative frames (MONSTER, STORM and TSUNAMI) and a literal frame used as control (FAMILY). The results show that while the FAMILY frame covers a wider portion of the corpus, among the figurative frames WAR, a highly conventional one, is the frame used most frequently. Yet, this frame does not seem to be apt to elaborate the discourse around some aspects involved in the current situation. Therefore, we conclude, in line with previous suggestions, a plethora of framing options-or a metaphor menu-may facilitate the communication of various aspects involved in the Covid-19-related discourse on the social media, and thus support civilians in the expression of their feelings, opinions and beliefs during the current pandemic.
Project description:Positive framing has been proposed as an intervention to increase COVID-19 vaccination intentions. However, available research has examined fictitious or unfamiliar treatments. This pre-registered study (aspredicted#78369) compared the effect of standard negatively framed EU patient information leaflets (PILs), with new positively framed PILs, on booster intentions (measured pre- and post-intervention) for AstraZeneca, Pfizer, and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines. A representative sample of 1222 UK-based adults was randomised to one of six groups in a factorial design with framing (Positive vs. Negative) and vaccine familiarity (same (as previous), familiar, unfamiliar) as factors. The benefit of positive framing was hypothesised to be strongest for the least familiar vaccine (Moderna). Framing was moderated by familiarity, where only the unfamiliar vaccine showed a benefit of positive relative to negative Framing. Framing and familiarity also interacted with baseline Intention with the effect of framing on the unfamiliar vaccine especially pronounced at low baseline Intent. Conversely, standard negative framing appeared to increase intentions for familiar vaccines at low baseline intent. Findings provide important evidence that positive framing could improve vaccine uptake globally when switches or new developments require individuals to receive less familiar vaccines. Positive framing of familiar vaccines, however, should be treated with caution until better understood.
Project description:Vaccine hesitancy and refusal remain a major concern for healthcare professionals and policymakers. Hence, it is necessary to ascertain the underlying factors that promote or hinder the uptake of vaccines. Authorities and policy makers are experimenting with vaccine promotion messages to communities using loss and gain-framed messages. However, the effectiveness of message framing in influencing the intention to be vaccinated is unclear. Based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), this study analysed the impact of individual attitude towards COVID-19 vaccination, direct and indirect social norms, perceived behavioural control and perceived threat towards South Indian millennials' intention to get vaccinated. The study also assessed the effect of framing vaccine communication messages with gain and loss framing. Data was collected from 228 Millennials from South India during the COVID-19 pandemic from September to October 2021 and analysed using PLS path modelling and Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA). The findings reveal that attitudes towards vaccination, perceived threat and indirect social norms positively impact millennials' intention to take up vaccines in both message frames. Further, independent sample t-test between the framing groups indicate that negative (loss framed message) leads to higher vaccination intention compared to positive (gain framed message). A loss-framed message is thus recommended for message framing to promote vaccine uptake among millennials. These findings provide useful information in understanding the impact of message framing on behavioural intentions, especially in the context of vaccine uptake intentions of Millennials in South India.
Project description:BackgroundAlthough past research has focused on COVID-19-related frames in the news media, such research may not accurately capture and represent the perspectives of people from diverse backgrounds. Additionally, research on the public attention to COVID-19 as reflected through frames on social media is scarce.ObjectiveThis study identified the frames about the COVID-19 pandemic in the public discourse on Twitter, which voices diverse opinions. This study also investigated the amount of public attention to those frames on Twitter.MethodsWe collected 22 trending hashtags related to COVID-19 in the United States and 694,582 tweets written in English containing these hashtags in March 2020 and analyzed them via thematic analysis. Public attention to these frames was measured by evaluating the amount of public engagement with frames and public adoption of those frames.ResultsWe identified 9 frames including "public health guidelines," "quarantine life," "solidarity," "evidence and facts," "call for action," "politics," "post-pandemic life," "shortage panic," and "conflict." Results showed that some frames such as "call for action" are more appealing than others during a global pandemic, receiving greater public adoption and engagement. The "call for action" frame had the highest engagement score, followed by "conflict" and "evidence and facts." Additionally, "post-pandemic life" had the highest adoption score, followed by "call for action" and "shortage panic." The findings indicated that the frequency of a frame on social media does not necessarily mean greater public adoption of or engagement with the frame.ConclusionsThis study contributes to framing theory and research by demonstrating how trending hashtags can be used as new user-generated data to identify frames on social media. This study concludes that the identified frames such as "quarantine life" and "conflict" and themes such as "isolation" and "toilet paper panic" represent the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The consequences could be (1) exclusively related to COVID-19, such as hand hygiene or isolation; (2) related to any health crisis such as social support of vulnerable groups; and (3) generic that are irrespective of COVID-19, such as homeschooling or remote working.
Project description:The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak that emerged at the end of 2019 has now swept the world for more than 2 years, causing immeasurable damage to the lives and economies of the world. It has drawn so much attention to discovering how the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) originated and entered the human body. The current argument revolves around two contradictory theories: a scenario of laboratory spillover events and human contact with zoonotic diseases. Here, we reviewed the transmission, pathogenesis, possible hosts, as well as the genome and protein structure of SARS-CoV-2, which play key roles in the COVID-19 pandemic. We believe the coronavirus was originally transmitted to human by animals rather than by a laboratory leak. However, there still needs more investigations to determine the source of the pandemic. Understanding how COVID-19 emerged is vital to developing global strategies for mitigating future outbreaks.