📝 SummarXiv

Abstract

This study investigates how the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) communicated COVID-19 guidance on Twitter and how publics responded over two years of the pandemic. Drawing on 275,124 tweets mentioning or addressing @CDCgov, I combine BERTopic modeling, sentiment analysis (VADER), credibility checks (Iffy Index), change point detection (PELT), and survival analysis to trace three phases of discourse: (1) early hoax claims and testing debates, (2) lockdown and mask controversies, and (3) post-vaccine variant concerns. I introduce the concept of crisis messaging journeys to explain how archived "receipts" of prior CDC statements fueled epistemic struggles, political polarization, and sustained engagement. Findings show that skeptical, cognitively complex discourse particularly questioning institutional trust prolonged participation, while positive affirmation predicted faster disengagement. I conclude with design recommendations for annotated, cautious, and flashpoint-responsive communication strategies to bolster public trust and resilience during protracted health crises.