Author
Listed:
- Tomasz Piróg
- Rafał Olszowski
- Piotr Pięta
- Tomasz Masłyk
Abstract
Social media play a crucial role in shaping public perceptions of migration during crises. This study examines how discourse on Ukrainians in Poland was framed on X/Twitter during the first year of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine (2022), contributing to research on framing and crisis communication in networked social media environments. Triangulating both quantitative and qualitative methods, we analysed 55,035 Polish-language posts containing the keywords “Ukrainians” and “in Poland.” The analysis combined frame analysis with several complementary methods: stance detection, network analysis, and engagement measurement based on a repost conversion rate. Our findings indicate that while posts displaying negative attitudes dominated in quantity (60%), positive posts had the highest conversion rate. The dominant frames included conflict, international relations and assistance to Ukrainians, highlighting a notable polarization of discourse. Network analysis identified four key user groups with distinct political affiliations. Right-wing government supporters (G1) and the liberal opposition (G4) expressed pro-Ukrainian sentiments, while users with nationalist views (G2) were critical of the influx of Ukrainian migrants. Although Group G2 generated the highest number of posts, their reach was limited due to lower engagement. In contrast, a smaller, politically diverse group (G3) maintained a more neutral stance. These findings demonstrate how integrating frame analysis with network analysis helps capture the relationship between interpretative frames and the structural dynamics of online communication. While solidarity with Ukrainians was strong in 2022, future research should examine how long-term migration processes transform online discourse over time.
Suggested Citation
Tomasz Piróg & Rafał Olszowski & Piotr Pięta & Tomasz Masłyk, 2026.
"Framing the crisis: X/Twitter discourse on Ukrainian war refugees in Poland,"
PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(5), pages 1-25, May.
Handle:
RePEc:plo:pone00:0346666
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0346666
Download full text from publisher
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:plo:pone00:0346666. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.