Cited by 99Mental Health via WritingSchizophrenia research and treatmentImpact of Technology on Adolescents

Linguistic Markers Indicating Therapeutic Outcomes of Social Media Disclosures of Schizophrenia

Ernala, Sindhu Kiranmai, Rizvi, Asra F., Birnbaum, Michael L., Kane, John M., De Choudhury, Munmun·2017·Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract

Self-disclosure of stigmatized conditions is known to yield therapeutic benefits. Social media sites are emerging as promising platforms enabling disclosure around a variety of stigmatized concerns, including mental illness. What kind of behavioral changes precede and follow such disclosures? Do the therapeutic benefits of "opening up" manifest in these changes? In this paper, we address these questions by focusing on disclosures of schizophrenia diagnoses made on Twitter. We adopt a clinically grounded quantitative approach to first identify temporal phases around disclosure during which symptoms of schizophrenia are likely to be significant. Then, to quantify behaviors before and after disclosures, we define linguistic measures drawing from literature on psycholinguistics and the socio-cognitive model of schizophrenia. Along with significant linguistic differences before and after disclosures, we find indications of therapeutic outcomes following disclosures, including improved readability and coherence in language, future orientation, lower self preoccupation, and reduced discussion of symptoms and stigma perceptions. We discuss the implications of social media as a new therapeutic tool in supporting disclosures of stigmatized conditions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3134678

Cites

66 of 66 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Online disclosures about mental illness appeared beneficial, as reflected by fewer posts about symptoms following self-disclosure.

    “Another study found that online disclosures about mental illness appeared beneficial as reflected by fewer posts about symptoms following self-disclosure (Ernala, Rizvi, Birnbaum, Kane, & De Choudhury, 2017).”

    From Social Media and Mental Health: Benefits, Risks, and Opportunities for Research and Practice (2020) · cites this paper as Ernala, Rizvi, Birnbaum, Kane, & De Choudhury, 2017

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 68 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ernala, S. K., Rizvi, A. F., Birnbaum, M. L., Kane, J. M., & De Choudhury, M.
Affiliations
  • Georgia Institute of Technology (US)
  • Zucker Hillside Hospital (US)
  • Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2017-12-06
Volume
1
Issue
CSCW
Pages
1-27
ISSN
2573-0142 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2773170638
Cited by
99
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9
FWCI
14.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (1R01GM11269701)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
Keywords
schizophrenia, self-disclosure, social media, Twitter, linguistic markers, treatment outcomes, mental health stigma, readability, coherence, future orientation, self-absorption

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review