↓ Skip to main content

Tweeting and Eating: The Effect of Links and Likes on Food-Hypersensitive Consumers’ Perceptions of Tweets

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Public Health, April 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Tweeting and Eating: The Effect of Links and Likes on Food-Hypersensitive Consumers’ Perceptions of Tweets
Published in
Frontiers in Public Health, April 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00118
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard J. T. Hamshaw, Julie Barnett, Jane S. Lucas

Abstract

Moving on from literature that focuses on how consumers use social media and the benefits of organizations utilizing platforms for health and risk communication, this study explores how specific characteristics of tweets affect the way in which they are perceived. An online survey with 251 participants with self-reported food hypersensitivity (FH) took part in an online experiment to consider the impact of tweet characteristics on perceptions of source credibility, message credibility, persuasiveness, and intention to act upon the presented information. Positioning the research hypotheses within the framework of the Elaboration Likelihood Model and Uses and Gratifications Theory, the study explored motivations for using social media and tested the impact of the affordances of Twitter-(1) the inclusion of links and (2) the number of social validation indicators (likes and retweets). Having links accompanying tweets significantly increased ratings of the tweets' message credibility, as well as persuasiveness of their content. Socially validated tweets had no effect on these same variables. Parents of FH children were found to utilize social media for social reasons more than hypersensitive adults; concern level surrounding a reaction did not appear to alter the level of use. Links were considered valuable in obtaining social media users to attend to useful or essential food health and risk information. Future research in this area can usefully consider the nature and the effects of social validation in relation to other social media platforms and with other groups.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Master 3 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 21 39%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 7 13%
Computer Science 3 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Psychology 3 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 4%
Other 11 20%
Unknown 25 46%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 November 2018.
All research outputs
#4,725,380
of 23,870,803 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Public Health
#1,777
of 11,570 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#88,725
of 328,642 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Public Health
#49
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,870,803 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,570 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,642 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.