Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance

Date Submitted: Jun 30, 2020
Date Accepted: Sep 24, 2020

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Electronic Cigarette–Related Contents on Instagram: Observational Study and Exploratory Analysis

Gao Y, Xie Z, Sun L, Xu C, Li D

Electronic Cigarette–Related Contents on Instagram: Observational Study and Exploratory Analysis

JMIR Public Health Surveill 2020;6(4):e21963

DOI: 10.2196/21963

PMID: 33151157

PMCID: 7677028

Exploratory Analysis of Electronic Cigarette-Related Contents on Instagram: Observational Study

  • Yankun Gao; 
  • Zidian Xie; 
  • Li Sun; 
  • Chenliang Xu; 
  • Dongmei Li

ABSTRACT

Background:

Instagram is a popular social networking platform for users to upload pictures to share their experiences. Instagram has been widely used by vape companies and stores to promote electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), as well as by public health entities to communicate with the public about the risk of e-cigarettes use (vaping).

Objective:

We aim to characterize current vaping-related content on Instagram through descriptive analyses.

Methods:

From Instagram, 42,951 posts were collected using vaping-related hashtags in November 2019. The posts were grouped as ‘pro-vaping’, ‘vaping-warning’, ‘neutral-to-vaping’ and ‘not-related-to-vaping’ based on their attitudes to vaping. From these Instagram posts and corresponding 18,786 unique Instagram user accounts, 200 pro-vaping and 200 vaping-warning posts, as well as 189 pro-vaping and 155 vaping-warning user accounts, were randomly selected for further hand-coding. Furthermore, the follower count and the media (post) count of the Instagram user accounts, as well as the like count and hashtags of the posts, were compared between pro-vaping and vaping-warning groups.

Results:

There were more posts in the pro-vaping group (41,412 posts) than the vaping-warning group (1,539 posts). The majority of pro-vaping images were product display (n=163, 81.5%), and the most popular image type in vaping-warning was educational (n=95, 47.5%). The highest proportion of pro-vaping user account type was the vaping store (n=110, 58.1%), and the store account type had the most average posts (10.33 post/account). The top three vaping-warning user account types were personal (n=79, 51%), vaping-warning community (n=37, 23.9%), and community (n=35, 22.6%), in which the vaping-warning community has the most average posts (3.68 posts/account). The pro-vaping user accounts had more follower count (median=850) and media count (median=232) than vaping-warning user accounts (median=191, 92 respectively). The pro-vaping posts had more like count (median=22) and the number of hashtags (mean=20.39) than vaping-warning posts (median=12, mean=7.16 respectively).

Conclusions:

Instagram had been dominated by the pro-vaping content, and the pro-vaping posts and user accounts seem to have more user engagement than vaping-warning. These results highlight the importance of regulating e-cigarette posts on social media, and the urgency of identifying effective communication with the public about the health effects of e-cigarettes to ameliorate the epidemic of vaping in youth.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Gao Y, Xie Z, Sun L, Xu C, Li D

Electronic Cigarette–Related Contents on Instagram: Observational Study and Exploratory Analysis

JMIR Public Health Surveill 2020;6(4):e21963

DOI: 10.2196/21963

PMID: 33151157

PMCID: 7677028

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.