IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jcsosc/v5y2022i1d10.1007_s42001-021-00148-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analyzing user-generated content using natural language processing: a case study of public satisfaction with healthcare systems

Author

Listed:
  • Anna Ruelens

    (University of Leuven)

Abstract

While user-generated online content (UGC) is increasingly available, public opinion studies are yet to fully exploit the abundance and richness of online data. This study contributes to the practical knowledge of user-generated online content and machine learning techniques that can be used for the analysis of UGC. For this purpose, we explore the potential of user-generated content and present an application of natural language pre-processing, text mining and sentiment analysis to the question of public satisfaction with healthcare systems. Concretely, we analyze 634 online comments reflecting attitudes towards healthcare services in different countries. Our analysis identifies the frequency of topics related to healthcare services in textual content of the comments and attempts to classify and rank national healthcare systems based on the respondents’ sentiment scores. In this paper, we describe our approach, summarize our main findings, and compare them with the results from cross-national surveys. Finally, we outline the typical limitations inherent in the analysis of user-generated online content and suggest avenues for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Anna Ruelens, 2022. "Analyzing user-generated content using natural language processing: a case study of public satisfaction with healthcare systems," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 731-749, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:jcsosc:v:5:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-021-00148-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s42001-021-00148-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s42001-021-00148-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s42001-021-00148-2?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimmer, Justin & Stewart, Brandon M., 2013. "Text as Data: The Promise and Pitfalls of Automatic Content Analysis Methods for Political Texts," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 21(3), pages 267-297, July.
    2. Wataru Souma & Irena Vodenska & Hideaki Aoyama, 2019. "Enhanced news sentiment analysis using deep learning methods," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 33-46, January.
    3. C. A. Piña-García & J. Mario Siqueiros-García & E. Robles-Belmont & Gustavo Carreón & Carlos Gershenson & Julio Amador Díaz López, 2018. "From neuroscience to computer science: a topical approach on Twitter," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 187-208, January.
    4. Bilal Naeem & Aymen Khan & Mirza Omer Beg & Hasan Mujtaba, 2020. "A deep learning framework for clickbait detection on social area network using natural language cues," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 231-243, April.
    5. Adam Badawy & Emilio Ferrara, 2018. "The rise of Jihadist propaganda on social networks," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 453-470, September.
    6. Bennett Kleinberg & Isabelle Vegt & Paul Gill, 2021. "The temporal evolution of a far-right forum," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Isabelle Vegt & Maximilian Mozes & Paul Gill & Bennett Kleinberg, 2021. "Correction to: Online influence, offline violence: language use on YouTube surrounding the ‘Unite the Right’ rally," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 921-923, November.
    8. Isabelle Vegt & Maximilian Mozes & Paul Gill & Bennett Kleinberg, 2021. "Online influence, offline violence: language use on YouTube surrounding the ‘Unite the Right’ rally," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 333-354, May.
    9. Elias Mossialos, 1997. "Citizens' Views on Health Care Systems in the 15 Member States of The European Union," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(2), pages 109-116, March.
    10. Shadi Shahsavari & Pavan Holur & Tianyi Wang & Timothy R. Tangherlini & Vwani Roychowdhury, 2020. "Conspiracy in the time of corona: automatic detection of emerging COVID-19 conspiracy theories in social media and the news," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 279-317, November.
    11. Austin Horng-En Wang & Mei-chun Lee & Min-Hsuan Wu & Puma Shen, 2020. "Influencing overseas Chinese by tweets: text-images as the key tactic of Chinese propaganda," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 469-486, November.
    12. Cohen, G., 1996. "Age and health status in a patient satisfaction survey," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 42(7), pages 1085-1093, April.
    13. Nicholas Francis Havey, 2020. "Partisan public health: how does political ideology influence support for COVID-19 related misinformation?," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 319-342, November.
    14. Jensen, Carsten & Naumann, Elias, 2016. "Increasing pressures and support for public healthcare in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 698-705.
    15. Joshua Uyheng & Kathleen M. Carley, 2020. "Bots and online hate during the COVID-19 pandemic: case studies in the United States and the Philippines," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 445-468, November.
    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. Emilio Ferrara & Stefano Cresci & Luca Luceri, 2020. "Misinformation, manipulation, and abuse on social media in the era of COVID-19," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 271-277, November.
    2. Laura Colautti & Alice Cancer & Sara Magenes & Alessandro Antonietti & Paola Iannello, 2022. "Risk-Perception Change Associated with COVID-19 Vaccine’s Side Effects: The Role of Individual Differences," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(3), pages 1-14, January.
    3. Zixuan Weng & Aijun Lin, 2022. "Public Opinion Manipulation on Social Media: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Bots during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Federica Maria Magarini & Margherita Pinelli & Arianna Sinisi & Silvia Ferrari & Giovanna Laura De Fazio & Gian Maria Galeazzi, 2021. "Irrational Beliefs about COVID-19: A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(19), pages 1-21, September.
    5. Schneider, Simone M. & Popic, Tamara, 2018. "Cognitive determinants of healthcare evaluations – A comparison of Eastern and Western European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(3), pages 269-278.
    6. Yaming Zhang & Wenjie Song & Jiang Shao & Majed Abbas & Jiaqi Zhang & Yaya H. Koura & Yanyuan Su, 2023. "Social Bots’ Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion on Twitter," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    7. Andrea Ceron & Luigi Curini & Stefano M. Iacus, 2019. "ISIS at Its Apogee: The Arabic Discourse on Twitter and What We Can Learn From That About ISIS Support and Foreign Fighters," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440187, March.
    8. Bernhardt, Lea & Dewenter, Ralf & Thomas, Tobias, 2020. "Measuring partisan media bias in US Newscasts from 2001-2012," Working Paper 183/2020, Helmut Schmidt University, Hamburg, revised 15 Nov 2022.
    9. Ntentas, Raphael, 2021. "Quantifying political populism and examining the link with economic insecurity: evidence from Greece," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 112579, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Olga Khokhlova & Nishtha Lamba & Aditi Bhatia & Marina Vinogradova, 2021. "Biowarfare conspiracy, faith in government, and compliance with safety guidelines during COVID-19: an international study," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 20(2), pages 235-251, November.
    11. Aaryan Gupta & Vinya Dengre & Hamza Abubakar Kheruwala & Manan Shah, 2020. "Comprehensive review of text-mining applications in finance," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 6(1), pages 1-25, December.
    12. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.
    13. Lin, Annie E. & Young, Jimmy A. & Guarino, Jeannine E., 2022. "Mother-Daughter sexual abuse: An exploratory study of the experiences of survivors of MDSA using Reddit," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    14. Ning Xiang & Limao Wang & Shuai Zhong & Chen Zheng & Bo Wang & Qiushi Qu, 2021. "How Does the World View China’s Carbon Policy? A Sentiment Analysis on Twitter Data," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    15. Rybinski, Krzysztof, 2020. "The forecasting power of the multi-language narrative of sell-side research: A machine learning evaluation," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).
    16. Rauh, Christian, 2015. "Communicating supranational governance? The salience of EU affairs in the German Bundestag, 1991–2013," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 16(1), pages 116-138.
    17. Grajzl, Peter & Murrell, Peter, 2021. "A machine-learning history of English caselaw and legal ideas prior to the Industrial Revolution I: generating and interpreting the estimates," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 17(1), pages 1-19, February.
    18. David Bholat & Stephen Hans & Pedro Santos & Cheryl Schonhardt-Bailey, 2015. "Text mining for central banks," Handbooks, Centre for Central Banking Studies, Bank of England, number 33, April.
    19. Julia Seiermann, 2018. "Only Words? How Power in Trade Agreement Texts Affects International Trade Flows," UNCTAD Blue Series Papers 80, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development.
    20. Sami Diaf & Jörg Döpke & Ulrich Fritsche & Ida Rockenbach, 2020. "Sharks and minnows in a shoal of words: Measuring latent ideological positions of German economic research institutes based on text mining techniques," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 202001, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.

    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:spr:jcsosc:v:5:y:2022:i:1:d:10.1007_s42001-021-00148-2. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.