Supplementing a survey with respondent Twitter data to measure e-cigarette information exposure

ABSTRACT

Social media data are increasingly used by researchers to gain insights on individuals’ behaviors and opinions. Platforms like Twitter provide access to individuals’ postings, networks of friends and followers, and the content to which they are exposed. This article presents the methods and results of an exploratory study to supplement survey data with respondents’ Twitter postings, networks of Twitter friends and followers, and information to which they were exposed about e-cigarettes. Twitter use is important to consider in e-cigarette research and other topics influenced by online information sharing and exposure. Further, Twitter metadata provide direct measures of user’s friends and followers as opposed to survey self-reports. We find that Twitter metadata provide similar information to survey questions on Twitter network size without inducing recall error or other measurement issues. Using sentiment coding and machine learning methods, we find Twitter can elucidate on topics difficult to measure via surveys such as online expressed opinions and network composition. We present and discuss models predicting whether respondents’ tweet positively about e-cigarettes using survey and Twitter data, finding the combined data to provide broader measures than either source alone.     

The effects of seasonal demand on depot location

Many of the cost functions associated with depot location algorithms assume an overall demand for a fixed period, usually one year. This paper describes an investigation into the effect of high seasonality within such demand figures on the optimal location of storage facilities. The preliminary results indicate that a more flexible approach for certain products could be worthwhile.     

Reporting unethical research behavior

Scientists, as professionals, have a responsibility to self-regulate. However, whistleblowing is rare. We investigated scientists' infrequent disclosure of unethical behavior by studying their responses to scenarios describing unethical research acts and compared their responses to those of research administrators. A cross-sectional survey was administered to National Science Foundation-funded principal investigators and their institutions' representatives (IRs) to the Office of Research Integrity. Both scientists and IRs proposed to respond to nearly all research behaviors that they rated as unethical. Scientists more often proposed responses limited to the research team (58% vs. 25% of cases, p < .001) whereas IRs more often proposed to inform an administrator or dean, journal editor, funding agency, professional society, or reporter. The prior behavior and academic rank of the scenario protagonist were associated with responses, but consequences of the unethical behavior were not. Scientists appear to perceive that they uphold their responsibility to respond to unethical behavior by disclosures within the research team, whereas administrators propose to report to externally accountable individuals, raising the question of whether scientists' behavior constitutes professional self-regulation or cover up.     

Change-in-mean tests in long-memory time series: a review of recent developments

AStA Advances in Statistical Analysis - It is well known that standard tests for a mean shift are invalid in long-range dependent time series. Therefore, several long-memory robust extensions of...     

ARE TRUSTWORTHINESS AND FAIRNESS ENOUGH? CONTEXTUAL FAMILY THERAPY AND THE GOOD FAMILY

The moral dimension of family therapy theory and practice has received increasing attention in recent years. Boszormenyi-Nagy was among the first to see that family therapy and moral questions are inseparable. His focus on relational ethics has helped us to reappropriate individual responsibility and accountability within a systemic context. Although contextual therapy has clearly enriched the field, we argue that its emphasis on trustworthiness and fairness provides a limited view of the good in family life and leads to three related problems. First, Boszormenyi-Nagy offers a compelling ethical vision of the family and then denies that he has done so, which undermines some of his key moral claims. Second, because fairness is defined subjectively, contextual therapy may not have the resources to deal with legitimate differences in family ideals. Third, the reliance on self-interest as the primary motive for trustworthy relating appears to be self-defeating. We offer a hermeneutic perspective that takes a broader approach to the good. It places greater emphasis on the social and historical context, deals squarely with different understandings of the good in family life, and recommends an approach to resolving these differences.