IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v361y2024ics0277953624008207.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Debates over the role of Traditional Chinese Medicine on COVID-19: A computational comparison between professionals and laypersons in Chinese online knowledge community

Author

Listed:
  • Li, Jinhui
  • Shi, Wen

Abstract

Leveraging a large collection of textual data (N = 21,539) from a Chinese online community, we employed structural topic modeling to investigate the thematic disparities between professionals and laypersons, regarding the effectiveness of Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) on COVID-19. Findings reveal that laypersons are the dominant communicators in terms of discussion volume, who often focus on relevant news events, societal or political aspects of TCM. In contrast, professionals keep concentrating on issues related to medical expertise, and do not shift attentions as frequent as laypersons. Despite the dominant influence of professionals on laypersons’ agenda, two-way agenda interactions identified confirm that lay public is empowered to negotiate with elite professionals under certain topics. Our results provide novel insights into the dynamic nature of attentions, behaviors, and relations among prominent communication actors, and encourage future research to examine the individual-level and societal-level impacts of these constructs in the emerging online media landscape.

Suggested Citation

  • Li, Jinhui & Shi, Wen, 2024. "Debates over the role of Traditional Chinese Medicine on COVID-19: A computational comparison between professionals and laypersons in Chinese online knowledge community," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 361(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:361:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624008207
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117366
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953624008207
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117366?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:361:y:2024:i:c:s0277953624008207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.