测量 Twitter 和 Reddit 档案中的气候反弹：词汇定义、记录响应与参与者更替
Measuring climate backlash in Twitter and Reddit archives: Lexical definitions, recorded responses and participant turnover
AI总结：
该研究通过处理 Twitter 和 Reddit 档案，运用词汇定义和响应模型，揭示操作定义、平台响应字段及观察边界如何影响气候反弹的测量结论，贡献在于说明测量后果而非测量个体反对。
AI中文摘要：
社交媒体档案常被用于研究对气候行动的抵制，但词汇、响应计数器和观察到的参与者所测量的并非同一社会过程。我们通过处理所有注册文件（无抽样）并应用透明、非排他性的词汇规则，检验了四个提供的 Twitter 和 Reddit 档案。该研究将框架共现与特定来源的时间及响应模型联系起来，然后将返回作者中的事件期变化与参与者更替分开。可再生能源术语在 Reddit 上与成本相关语言相伴出现，但更狭窄的反弹短语大幅减少了跨来源对比，并逆转了提交内容中《巴黎协定》对比的符号。跨话语历史并未改善符合条件的首要上下文预测。否认/骗局术语与较高的记录在案的 Twitter 点赞数相关，而 Reddit 的响应关联则取决于框架、结果和作者规格。在 2019 年全球气候罢工前后，返回作者的表达和参与者更替均对抗议语言份额的增加有所贡献。一个档案端点阻止了相应的气候 Twitter 迁移推断。大多数跨聚类估计缺乏已发布的区间，且联合作者/月份响应协方差估计失败，限制了正式推断。这些结果表明，操作定义、平台特定的响应字段和观察边界如何塑造了关于气候反弹所能声称的内容。其贡献是基于档案对这些测量后果的说明，而非对个体反对、说服或倡导引发的反弹的测量。
英文摘要：
Social media archives are often used to study resistance to climate action, but words, response counters and observed participants do not measure the same social process. We examine four supplied Twitter and Reddit archives by processing all registered files without sampling and applying transparent, non-exclusive lexical rules. The study links frame co-occurrence to source-specific temporal and response models, then separates event-period changes among returning authors from participant turnover. Renewable-energy terms accompany cost-related language on Reddit, yet narrower backlash phrases sharply reduce cross-source contrasts and reverse the sign of the Paris Agreement contrast in submissions. Cross-discourse history does not improve eligible primary-context forecasts. Denial/hoax terms are associated with higher recorded Twitter likes, whereas Reddit response associations depend on frame, outcome and author specification. Around the 2019 global climate strike, returning-author expression and participant turnover both contribute to increased protest-language shares. An archive endpoint prevents the corresponding Climate Twitter migration inference. Most crossed-cluster estimates lack released intervals, and joint author/month response covariance estimates fail, restricting formal inference. These results show how operational definitions, platform-specific response fields and observation boundaries shape what can be claimed about climate backlash. The contribution is an archive-based account of these measurement consequences, rather than a measure of individual opposition, persuasion or advocacy-induced backlash.
