IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i20p13103-d939825.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stayin’ Alive in Little 5: Application of Sentiment Analysis to Investigate Emotions of Service Industry Workers Responding to Drug Overdoses

Author

Listed:
  • Sarah Febres-Cordero

    (Nell Hodgson Woodruff School of Nursing, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA)

  • Daniel Jackson Smith

    (Fitzpatrick College of Nursing, Villanova University, Villanova, PA 19085, USA)

Abstract

The opioid epidemic has increasingly been recognized as a public health issue and has challenged our current legal, social, and ethical beliefs regarding drug use. The epidemic not only impacts persons who use drugs, but also those around them, including people who do not expect to witness an overdose. For example, in the commercial district of Little 5 Points, Atlanta, GA, many service industry workers have become de facto responders to opioid overdoses when a person experiences an opioid-involved overdose in their place of employment. To provide additional insights into >300 pages of interview data collected from service industry workers that have responded to an opioid overdose while at work, we utilized a mixed-methods approach to conduct this sentiment analysis. First, using R version 4.2.1, a data-science based textual analytic approach was applied to the interview data. Using a corpus algorithm, each line of interview text was characterized as one of the eight following sentiments, anger, anticipation, disgust, fear, joy, sadness, surprise, or trust. Once having identified statements that fit into each of these eight codes, qualitative thematic analysis was conducted. The three most prevalent emotions elucidated from these interviews with service industry workers were trust, anticipation, and joy with 20.4%, 16.2%, and 14.7% across all statements, respectively labeled as each emotion. Thematic analysis revealed three themes in the data: (1) individuals have a part to address in the opioid epidemic, (2) communities have many needs related to the opioid crisis, and (3) structural forces create pathways and barriers to opioid overdose response and rescue. This analysis thematically identified roles service industry workers have in addressing the opioid crisis in Atlanta. Similarly, community needs and barriers to responding to an opioid-involved overdose were characterized. Uniquely, this study found key sentiments related to each of these themes. Future research can leverage these findings to inform the development of overdose prevention and response interventions for service industry works that systematically address common emotions and beliefs trainees may have.

Suggested Citation

  • Sarah Febres-Cordero & Daniel Jackson Smith, 2022. "Stayin’ Alive in Little 5: Application of Sentiment Analysis to Investigate Emotions of Service Industry Workers Responding to Drug Overdoses," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:20:p:13103-:d:939825
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13103/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13103/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Feinerer, Ingo & Hornik, Kurt & Meyer, David, 2008. "Text Mining Infrastructure in R," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 25(i05).
    2. Whittle, Henry J. & Palar, Kartika & Hufstedler, Lee Lemus & Seligman, Hilary K. & Frongillo, Edward A. & Weiser, Sheri D., 2015. "Food insecurity, chronic illness, and gentrification in the San Francisco Bay Area: An example of structural violence in United States public policy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 154-161.
    3. Benjamin Saunders & Julius Sim & Tom Kingstone & Shula Baker & Jackie Waterfield & Bernadette Bartlam & Heather Burroughs & Clare Jinks, 2018. "Saturation in qualitative research: exploring its conceptualization and operationalization," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 52(4), pages 1893-1907, July.
    4. Phelan, J.C. & Link, B.G., 1999. "Who are 'the homeless'? Reconsidering the stability and composition of the homeless population," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 89(9), pages 1334-1338.
    5. Cooper, H. & Moore, L. & Gruskin, S. & Krieger, N., 2004. "Characterizing perceived police violence: Implications for public health," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 94(7), pages 1109-1118.
    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. Jennifer Tartaglia & Michelle McIntosh & Jonine Jancey & Jane Scott & Andrea Begley, 2021. "Exploring Feeding Practices and Food Literacy in Parents with Young Children from Disadvantaged Areas," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(4), pages 1-18, February.
    2. Najwa Taghy & Linda Cambon & Caroline Boulliat & Olivier Aromatario & Claude Dussart, 2021. "Exploring the Determinants of Polypharmacy Prescribing and Dispensing Behaviours in Primary Care for the Elderly—Protocol for a Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(14), pages 1-10, July.
    3. Grinis, Inna, 2017. "The STEM requirements of "non-STEM" jobs: evidence from UK online vacancy postings and implications for skills & knowledge shortages," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 85123, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Van Droogenbroeck, Ellen & Van Hove, Leo, 2020. "Intra-household task allocation in online grocery shopping: Together alone," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    5. Julia Bachtrögler & Christoph Hammer & Wolf Heinrich Reuter & Florian Schwendinger, 2019. "Guide to the galaxy of EU regional funds recipients: evidence from new data," Empirica, Springer;Austrian Institute for Economic Research;Austrian Economic Association, vol. 46(1), pages 103-150, February.
    6. repec:thr:techub:10019:y:2021:i:1:p:607-630 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Anita Hubley & Lara Russell & Anita Palepu & Stephen Hwang, 2014. "Subjective Quality of Life Among Individuals who are Homeless: A Review of Current Knowledge," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 509-524, January.
    8. Şahika Simsek-Cetinkaya & Simge Evrenol Ocal, 2023. "“Psychological Injuries Are Not Visible†: Experiences and Perceptions of Midwives and Nurses about Domestic Violence during Pregnancy," Clinical Nursing Research, , vol. 32(8), pages 1115-1123, November.
    9. Najwa Taghy & Viviane Ramel & Ana Rivadeneyra & Florence Carrouel & Linda Cambon & Claude Dussart, 2023. "Exploring the Determinants of Polypharmacy Prescribing and Dispensing Behaviors in Primary Care for the Elderly—Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-17, January.
    10. Xudan Lin & Hong Zhu & Duo Yin, 2022. "Enhancing Rural Resilience in a Tea Town of China: Exploring Tea Farmers’ Knowledge Production for Tea Planting, Tea Processing and Tea Tasting," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-18, April.
    11. Shuyue Huang & Lena Jingen Liang & Hwansuk Chris Choi, 2022. "How We Failed in Context: A Text-Mining Approach to Understanding Hotel Service Failures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-18, February.
    12. Laura Anderlucci & Cinzia Viroli, 2020. "Mixtures of Dirichlet-Multinomial distributions for supervised and unsupervised classification of short text data," Advances in Data Analysis and Classification, Springer;German Classification Society - Gesellschaft für Klassifikation (GfKl);Japanese Classification Society (JCS);Classification and Data Analysis Group of the Italian Statistical Society (CLADAG);International Federation of Classification Societies (IFCS), vol. 14(4), pages 759-770, December.
    13. Silvia Scaramuzzi & Sara Gabellini & Giovanni Belletti & Andrea Marescotti, 2021. "Agrobiodiversity-Oriented Food Systems between Public Policies and Private Action: A Socio-Ecological Model for Sustainable Territorial Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-32, November.
    14. Stefano Sbalchiero & Maciej Eder, 2020. "Topic modeling, long texts and the best number of topics. Some Problems and solutions," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(4), pages 1095-1108, August.
    15. Tongyu Meng & Jamie Newth & Christine Woods, 2022. "Ethical Sensemaking in Impact Investing: Reasons and Motives in the Chinese Renewable Energy Sector," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 179(4), pages 1091-1117, September.
    16. Annette Peart & Virginia Lewis & Chris Barton & Grant Russell, 2020. "Healthcare professionals providing care coordination to people living with multimorbidity: An interpretative phenomenological analysis," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(13-14), pages 2317-2328, July.
    17. Soo-Yong Shin & Eun-Ju Lim, 2021. "Clinical Work and Life of Mid-Career Male Nurses: A Qualitative Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(12), pages 1-10, June.
    18. Fatoumata Fofana & Pat Bazeley & Antoine Regnault, 2020. "Applying a mixed methods design to test saturation for qualitative data in health outcomes research," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-12, June.
    19. Daoud, Adel & Kohl, Sebastian, 2016. "How much do sociologists write about economic topics? Using big data to test some conventional views in economic sociology, 1890 to 2014," MPIfG Discussion Paper 16/7, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    20. Alasdair Jones & Susan Parham, 2023. "Living in an Age-Friendly Community: Evidence from a Masterplanned Development in Southwest Sydney," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-21, January.
    21. Necmettin Alpay Koçak, 2020. "The Role of Ecb Speeches in Nowcasting German Gdp," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2020(2), pages 05-20.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:20:p:13103-:d:939825. 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.