The psychological effects of quarantine during COVID-19 outbreak: Sentiment analysis of social media data

  1. Weisheng Lu
  2. Liang Yuan
  3. Jinying Xu
  4. Fan Xue
  5. Bin Zhao
  6. Chris Webster

Reviewed by

Read the full article See related articles

Listed in

Log in to save this article

Abstract

We rely on social distancing measures such as quarantine and isolation to contain the COVID-19. However, the negative psychological effects of these measures are non-negligible. To supplement previous research on psychological effects after quarantine, this research will investigate the effects of quarantine amid COVID-19. We adopt a sentiment analysis approach to analyze the psychological state changes of 1,278 quarantined persons’ 214,874 tweets over four weeks spanning the period before, during, and after quarantine. We formed a control group of 1,278 unquarantined persons with 250,198 tweets. The tweets of both groups are analyzed by matching with a lexicon to measure the anxious depression level changes over time. We discovered a clear pattern of psychological changes for quarantined persons. Anxious depression levels significantly increased as quarantine starts, but gradually diminished as it progresses. However, anxious depression levels resurged after 14 days’ quarantine. It was found that quarantine has a negative impact on mental health of quarantined and unquarantined people. Whilst quarantine is deemed necessary, proper interventions such as emotion management should be introduced to mitigate its adverse psychological impacts.

Article activity feed

  1. ScreenIT

    SciScore for 10.1101/2020.06.25.20140426: (What is this?)

    Please note, not all rigor criteria are appropriate for all manuscripts.

    Table 1: Rigor

    NIH rigor criteria are not applicable to paper type.

    Table 2: Resources

    Software and Algorithms
    SentencesResources
    Secondly, using the queries, we collected 2,462 users from the Twitter website using the Python tool “TweetScraper”.
    Python
    suggested: (IPython, RRID:SCR_001658)

    Results from OddPub: We did not detect open data. We also did not detect open code. Researchers are encouraged to share open data when possible (see Nature blog).

    Results from LimitationRecognizer: An explicit section about the limitations of the techniques employed in this study was not found. We encourage authors to address study limitations.

    Results from TrialIdentifier: No clinical trial numbers were referenced.

    Results from Barzooka: We did not find any issues relating to the usage of bar graphs.

    Results from JetFighter: We did not find any issues relating to colormaps.

    Results from rtransparent:
    • Thank you for including a conflict of interest statement. Authors are encouraged to include this statement when submitting to a journal.
    • No funding statement was detected.
    • No protocol registration statement was detected.

    About SciScore

    SciScore is an automated tool that is designed to assist expert reviewers by finding and presenting formulaic information scattered throughout a paper in a standard, easy to digest format. SciScore checks for the presence and correctness of RRIDs (research resource identifiers), and for rigor criteria such as sex and investigator blinding. For details on the theoretical underpinning of rigor criteria and the tools shown here, including references cited, please follow this link.

  2. Version published to 10.1101/2020.06.25.20140426v1 on medRxiv