IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i2p613-d1567054.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sentiment Evolution of Online Public Opinion of Emergency Situations in Railway Stations: A Case Study of Wuhan Railway Stations

Author

Listed:
  • Yifan Wu

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Fan Zhang

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Albert P. C. Chan

    (Department of Building and Real Estate, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China)

  • Dezhi Li

    (School of Civil Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China)

Abstract

Preventing secondary crises resulting from emergency incidents in engineering projects is a crucial and complex task for project operation management. Public opinion and its underlying sentiment can act as reliable indicators, reflecting the progression of emergency incidents, and warrant serious consideration. With the advent of Web 2.0, the management of online public opinion (OPO) through social platforms has advanced significantly. However, previous research has overlooked the diverse categories of participants contributing to OPO evolution. This article proposes an optimised bounded confidence model (BCM) for sentiment OPO evolution under emergency situations at railway stations, incorporating multiple participant categories. A conceptual model based on eleven assumptions is developed, involving four key participants (netizens, media, opinion leaders, and government) structured into four sub-processes. To illustrate this model, the case of the Wuhan railway stations’ blockade during the COVID-19 outbreak is examined. This case study demonstrates the initial data acquisition and simulation process. The standard simulation results are recorded, followed by a multiple-sensitivity analysis to investigate the impact of various critical factor combinations on OPO evolution. Finally, policy recommendations are provided to government departments to enhance their response to emergency situations, particularly those involving railway stations, thereby ensuring public safety.

Suggested Citation

  • Yifan Wu & Fan Zhang & Albert P. C. Chan & Dezhi Li, 2025. "Sentiment Evolution of Online Public Opinion of Emergency Situations in Railway Stations: A Case Study of Wuhan Railway Stations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-29, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:2:p:613-:d:1567054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/613/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/613/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Firestone, Jeremy & Kempton, Willett, 2007. "Public opinion about large offshore wind power: Underlying factors," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 1584-1598, March.
    2. Xiangdong Liu & Axiao Cao & Chuyang Li, 2021. "Novel Network Public Opinion Prediction and Guidance Model Based on “S-Curve”: Taking the Loss of Contact with “Malaysia Airlines”," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-13, July.
    3. Shan Gao & Ye Zhang & Wenhui Liu, 2021. "How Does Risk-Information Communication Affect the Rebound of Online Public Opinion of Public Emergencies in China?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-14, July.
    4. Cheng, Chun & Yu, Changbin, 2019. "Opinion dynamics with bounded confidence and group pressure," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 532(C).
    5. Cheng’ai Sun & Caixia Jing & Xiaodan Zhou & Kun Li & Tangjun Li, 2023. "Research on SnCIR multi-opinion competitive communication model," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 34(10), pages 1-16, October.
    6. Chen, Shuwei & Glass, David H. & McCartney, Mark, 2016. "Characteristics of successful opinion leaders in a bounded confidence model," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 449(C), pages 426-436.
    7. Thomas Moore & Patrick Finley & Nancy Brodsky & Theresa Brown & Benjamin Apelberg & Bridget Ambrose & Robert Glass, 2015. "Modeling Education and Advertising with Opinion Dynamics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 18(2), pages 1-7.
    8. Javier Gómez-Serrano & Jean-Yves Le Boudec, 2012. "Comment On "Mixing Beliefs Among Interacting Agents"," Advances in Complex Systems (ACS), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(07), pages 1-7.
    9. Xin Wan & Yantong Zhang & Rubing Wang & Jingfeng Yuan & Mengliu Hu & Ruyu Li & Minye Wang & Ziyao Huang & Cheng Tu & Fujian Zhong & Wenjing Cui & Siew Ann Cheong, 2021. "Causation of Metro Operation Accidents in China: Calculation of Network Node Importance Based on DEMATEL and ISM," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-16, November.
    10. Chung-Yuan Huang & Tzai-Hung Wen, 2014. "A Novel Private Attitude and Public Opinion Dynamics Model for Simulating Pluralistic Ignorance and Minority Influence," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 17(3), pages 1-8.
    11. Elizabeth Hunter & Brian Mac Namee & John D. Kelleher, 2017. "A Taxonomy for Agent-Based Models in Human Infectious Disease Epidemiology," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 20(3), pages 1-2.
    12. Dietrich Stauffer, 2002. "The Sznajd Model Of Consensus Building With Limited Persuasion," International Journal of Modern Physics C (IJMPC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(03), pages 315-317.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wustenhagen, Rolf & Wolsink, Maarten & Burer, Mary Jean, 2007. "Social acceptance of renewable energy innovation: An introduction to the concept," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2683-2691, May.
    2. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2011. "Understanding the variability of wind power costs," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 15(8), pages 3632-3639.
    3. Michael T Gastner & Károly Takács & Máté Gulyás & Zsuzsanna Szvetelszky & Beáta Oborny, 2019. "The impact of hypocrisy on opinion formation: A dynamic model," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-21, June.
    4. Ali Asgary & Hudson Blue & Adriano O. Solis & Zachary McCarthy & Mahdi Najafabadi & Mohammad Ali Tofighi & Jianhong Wu, 2022. "Modeling COVID-19 Outbreaks in Long-Term Care Facilities Using an Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-16, February.
    5. Dimitris Tsintsaris & Milan Tsompanoglou & Evangelos Ioannidis, 2024. "Dynamics of Social Influence and Knowledge in Networks: Sociophysics Models and Applications in Social Trading, Behavioral Finance and Business," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-27, April.
    6. Ho, Lip-Wah & Lie, Tek-Tjing & Leong, Paul TM & Clear, Tony, 2018. "Developing offshore wind farm siting criteria by using an international Delphi method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 53-67.
    7. Russell, Aaron & Bingaman, Samantha & Garcia, Hannah-Marie, 2021. "Threading a moving needle: The spatial dimensions characterizing US offshore wind policy drivers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    8. Talal Daghriri & Michael Proctor & Sarah Matthews, 2022. "Evolution of Select Epidemiological Modeling and the Rise of Population Sentiment Analysis: A Literature Review and COVID-19 Sentiment Illustration," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(6), pages 1-20, March.
    9. Haggett, Claire, 2011. "Understanding public responses to offshore wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(2), pages 503-510, February.
    10. David Rudolph & Claire Haggett & Mhairi Aitken, 2018. "Community benefits from offshore renewables: The relationship between different understandings of impact, community, and benefit," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(1), pages 92-117, February.
    11. Valentine, Scott Victor, 2010. "A STEP toward understanding wind power development policy barriers in advanced economies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 14(9), pages 2796-2807, December.
    12. Pine, Matthew K. & Schmitt, Pál & Culloch, Ross M. & Lieber, Lilian & Kregting, Louise T., 2019. "Providing ecological context to anthropogenic subsea noise: Assessing listening space reductions of marine mammals from tidal energy devices," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 49-57.
    13. D׳Souza, Clare & Yiridoe, Emmanuel K., 2014. "Social acceptance of wind energy development and planning in rural communities of Australia: A consumer analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 262-270.
    14. Marianna Cavallo & Alicia Bugeja Said & José A Pérez Agúndez, 2023. "Who Is in and Who Is out in Ocean Economies Development?," Post-Print hal-04044150, HAL.
    15. Elizabeth Hunter & Brian Mac Namee & John D. Kelleher, 2020. "A Model for the Spread of Infectious Diseases in a Region," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-19, April.
    16. Ding, Haixin & Xie, Li, 2024. "The applicability of positive information in negative opinion management: An attitude-laden communication perspective," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 645(C).
    17. A.H.T. Shyam Kularathna & Sayaka Suda & Ken Takagi & Shigeru Tabeta, 2019. "Evaluation of Co-Existence Options of Marine Renewable Energy Projects in Japan," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-26, May.
    18. AskariSichani, Omid & Jalili, Mahdi, 2015. "Influence maximization of informed agents in social networks," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 254(C), pages 229-239.
    19. Petter Gudding & Gorm Kipperberg & Craig Bond & Kelly Cullen & Eric Steltzer, 2018. "When a Good Is a Bad (or a Bad Is a Good)—Analysis of Data from an Ambiguous Nonmarket Valuation Setting," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-16, January.
    20. Devine-Wright, Patrick & Devine-Wright, Hannah & Sherry-Brennan, Fionnguala, 2010. "Visible technologies, invisible organisations: An empirical study of public beliefs about electricity supply networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4127-4134, August.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:2:p:613-:d:1567054. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.