Skip to main content

Natural vs. Artificially Sweet Tweets: Characterizing Discussions of Non-nutritive Sweeteners on Twitter

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Explainable AI in Healthcare and Medicine

Part of the book series: Studies in Computational Intelligence ((SCI,volume 914))

Abstract

This ongoing project aims to use social media data to study consumer behaviors regarding natural and artificial sweeteners Following the recent shifts to natural sweeteners such as Stevia versus artificial, and traditionally-used ones like aspartame in recent years, there has been discussion around potential negative side effects, including memory loss and other chronic illnesses. These issues are discussed on Twitter, and we hypothesize that Twitter may provide insights into how people make nutritional decisions about the safety of sweeteners given the inconclusive science surrounding the topic, how factors such as risk and consumer attitude are interrelated, and how information and misinformation about food safety is shared on social media. As an initial step, we describe a new dataset containing 308,738 de-duplicated English-language tweets spanning multiple years. We conduct a topic model analysis and characterize tweet volumes over time, showing a diversity of sweetener-related content and discussion. Our findings suggest a variety of research questions that these data may support.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Abbar, S., Mejova, Y., Weber, I.: You tweet what you eat: studying food consumption through Twitter. In: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Ayers, J.W., Althouse, B.M., Johnson, M., Dredze, M., Cohen, J.E.: What’s the healthiest day? circaseptan (weekly) rhythms in healthy considerations. Am. J. Prev. Med. 47(1), 73–76 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blei, D.M., Ng, A., Jordan, M.: Latent Dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 993–1022 (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. De Choudhury, M., Sharma, S., Kiciman, E.: Characterizing dietary choices, nutrition, and language in food deserts via social media. In: Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (CSCW). pp. 1157–1170. ACM, New York (2016). 10.1145/2818048.2819956, http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2818048.2819956

  5. Fried, D., Surdeanu, M., Kobourov, S., Hingle, M., Bell, D.: Analyzing the language of food on social media. In: IEEE International Conference on Big Data (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kusmierczyk, T., Trattner, C., Norvag, K.: Temporality in online food recipe consumption and production. In: International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Mejova, Y., Haddadi, H., Noulas, A., Weber, I.: #foodporn: obesity patterns in culinary interactions. In: International Conference on Digital Health, pp. 51–58 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Nguyen, C.Q., Li, D., Meng, H.W., Kath, S., Nsoesie, E., Li, F., Wen, M.: Building a national neighborhood dataset from geotagged Twitter data for indicators of happiness, diet, and physical activity. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2(2), e158 (2016). https://doi.org/10.2196/publichealth.5869, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27751984

  9. Pagoto, S., Schneider, K.L., Evans, M., Waring, M.E., Appelhans, B., Busch, A.M., Whited, M.C., Thind, H., Ziedonis, M.: Tweeting it off: characteristics of adults who tweet about a weight loss attempt. J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc. 21(6), 1032–1037 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Paul, M.J., Dredze, M.: Social monitoring for public health. In: Synthesis Lectures on Information Concepts, Retrieval, and Services, pp. 1–185. Morgan & Claypool (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pawar, R., Krynitsky, A., Rader, J.: Sweeteners from plants-with emphasis on Stevia rebaudiana (bertoni) and Siraitia grosvenorii (swingle). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 405, 4397–4407 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Sharma, S., De Choudhury, M.: Detecting and characterizing nutritional information of food and ingestion content in Instagram. In: International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW) (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  13. West, R., White, R.W., Horvitz, E.: From cookies to cooks: Insights on dietary patterns via analysis of web usage logs. In: International Conference on World Wide Web (WWW). Republic and Canton of Geneva, Switzerland (2013)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Paul .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Batan, H., Radpour, D., Kehlbacher, A., Klein-Seetharaman, J., Paul, M.J. (2021). Natural vs. Artificially Sweet Tweets: Characterizing Discussions of Non-nutritive Sweeteners on Twitter. In: Shaban-Nejad, A., Michalowski, M., Buckeridge, D.L. (eds) Explainable AI in Healthcare and Medicine. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 914. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53352-6_16

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics