디지털융복합연구 (Journal of Digital Convergence)

  • 제18권10호
  • /
  • Pages.239-252
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 2713-6434(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2713-6442(eISSN)
한국디지털정책학회 (The Society of Digital Policy and Management)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

도로 위의 군비경쟁: LDA 토픽모델을 활용한 SUV의 인기 요인 탐구

The Arms Race on the Road: Exploring Factors of SUVs' Popularity by LDA Topic Model

  • 전승봉 (한국기술교육대학교 교양학부) ;
  • 고태경 (서강대학교 사회학과)
  • 투고 : 2020.09.03
  • 심사 : 2020.10.20
  • 발행 : 2020.10.28
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구자들은 텍스트 마이닝을 활용하여 SUV 선호 증가의 요인을 탐색하고자 한다. 온라인 자동차 커뮤니티인 보배드림에서 2005년부터 2019년까지 작성된 SUV 관련 게시글 32,679개를 수집한 후, LDA 토픽모델링 기법을 적용하였다. 분석 결과, SUV 담화에서 주요한 토픽으로 등장한 '안전'이 범죄로부터 개인의 위험에 주목한 기존 연구와 달리 교통사고 및 고속주행 상황에서의 안전을 의미하는 것으로 드러났다. 한국 사회의 SUV 소비는 개인이 운전하면서 느끼는 불안과 위험에 대한 대비 수단을 의미한다고 볼 수 있다는 것이다. 또한, 이와 같은 위험 인식 저변에는 불평등 증대로 인해 감소하는 타인에 대한 신뢰가 작동한다고 할 수 있다.

By using text mining, we explore the factors responsible for an increase in SUV preference. We collected 32,679 posts related to SUVs from "Bobaedream," the largest online automobile community in South Korea, and applied the LDA topic model. While previous studies have explained the SUV boom as an individual's risk aversion strategy from crime, the result shows that the topic of 'Safety' appears to be an important factor in the SUV discourse in the context of a car accident and high-speed driving situation. To conclude, the consumption of SUVs in Korean society serves as a mean to prevent anxiety and danger to individuals when driving. We insist that decreasing social trust, caused by an increase in inequality, underlies the perception of risk on the road.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. T. J. Kim. (2019. 6. 19). The trend and status of new SUV. CARISYOU. https://www.carisyou.com/magazine/STATS/75263
  2. O. Khazan. (2017. 11. 30). What SUVs reveal about the erosion of American society. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/science-/archive/2017/11/suvs-and-trust/547076/
  3. K. Bradsher. (2000. 7. 23). The latest fashion: Fear-of-crime design. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2000/07/23/weekinreview/ideas-trends-the-latest-fashion-fear-of-crime-design.html
  4. J. Lauer. (2005). Driven to extremes: Fear of crime and the rise of the sport utility vehicle in the United States. Crime, Media, Culture: An International Journal, 1(2), 149-168. DOI : 10.1177/1741659005054024
  5. R. Wilkinson & K. Pickett. (2011). The spirit level: Why greater equality makes societies stronger. Reprint ed., London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  6. R. Wilk. (2002). Consumption, human needs, and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 12(1), 5-13. DOI : 10.1016/s0959-3780(01)00028-0
  7. J. Y. Park. (2018. 7. 8). SUV, why is it global?. Joongang-ilbo. https://news.joins.com/article/22781759
  8. Softengine. (2018. 4. 1). Why SUVs are popular, will the storm continue?. Naver Post. https://post.naver.com/viewer/postView.nhn?volumeNo=14477163&memberNo=1047921
  9. Y. S. Na. (2017. 3. 2). Big, safe car? some misconceptions about SUVs. Auto&News. https://auto.v.daum.net/v/nwKYF24ct8?f=p
  10. R. D. Putnam. (1995). Bowling alone: America's declining social capital. Journal of Democracy, Vol.6, 65-78. DOI : 10.1353/jod.1995.0002
  11. I. Kawachi & L. Berkman. (2000). Social cohesion, social capital, and health. In L. F. Berkman & I. Kawachi(Eds.), Social epidemiology (pp. 174-190). New York: Oxford University Press.
  12. B. P. Kennedy, I. Kawachi, D. Prothrow-Stith, K. Lochner & V. Gupta. (1998). Social capital, income inequality, and firearm violent crime. Social Science & Medicine, 47(1), 7-17. DOI : 10.1016/s0277-9536(98)00097-5
  13. B. Glassner. (1999). The culture of fear: Why Americans are afraid of the wrong things. Basic Books.
  14. R. J. Sampson & W. J. Wilson. (1995). Toward a theory of race, crime, and urban inequality. In J. Hagan & R. Peterson(Eds.), Crime and inequality (pp. 37-54). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
  15. B. Rothstein & E. M. Uslaner. (2005). All for all: Equality, corruption, and social trust. World Politics, 58(1), 41-72. DOI : 10.1353/wp.2006.0022
  16. D. Harvey. (2005). A brief history of neoliberalism. New York: Oxford University Press.
  17. J. M. Song & J. H. Kang. (2018). Two daughters of Megalia: Identity differentiation in response to the anonymity level in online community. Korean Journal of Sociology, 52(4), 161-206. DOI : 10.21562/kjs.2018.11.52.4.161
  18. J. W. Rhee & S. H. Kim. (2018). News frames in the coverage of fine-dust disaster - Application of structural topic modeling. Korean Journal of Journalism & Communication Studies, 62(4), 125-158. DOI : 10.20879/kjjcs.2018.62.4.004
  19. D. H. Seol, J. H. Ko & S. H. Yoo. (2018). Korean sociological association and sociological research: Changes in the areas of sociology in Korea 1964-2017. Korean Journal of Sociology, 52(1), 153-213. DOI : 10.21562/kjs.2018.02.52.1.153
  20. D. Blei. (2012). Probabilistic topic models. Communicatio-ns of the ACM, 55(4), 77-84. DOI : 10.1145/2133806.2133826
  21. D. Blei, A. Y. Ng & M. I. Jordan. (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 3(Jan), 993-1022.
  22. R. Brauer & M. Dymitrow. (2014). Quality of life in rural areas: A topic for the rural development policy?. Bulletin of Geography. Socio-economic Series, 25(25), 25-54. DOI : 10.2478/bog-2014-0028
  23. D. Greene & J. P. Cross. (2015). Unveiling the political agenda of the European parliament plenary: A topical analysis. Proceedings of the ACM Web Science Conference, 1-10. DOI : 10.1145/2786451.2786464
  24. M. Paul & M. Dredze. (2012). Factorial LDA: Sparse multi-dimensional text models. Advances in neural information processing systems (pp.2591-2599). Lake Tahoe, Nevada, USA.
  25. X. P. Zhang, X. Z. Zhou, H. K. Huang, Q. Feng, S. B. Chen & B. Y. Liu. (2011). Topic model for Chinese medicine diagnosis and prescription regularities analysis: Case on diabetes. Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine, 17(4), 307-313. DOI : 10.1007/s11655-011-0699-x
  26. A. C. Kozlowski, M. Taddy & J. A. Evans. (2019). The geometry of culture: Analyzing the meanings of class through word embeddings. American Sociological Review, 84(5), 905-949. https://doi.org/10.1177/0003122419877135
  27. C. B. Mayhorn, M. S. Wogalter & V. Conzola. (2010). Perceptions of sport-utility vehicle (SUV) safety by SUV drivers and non-Drivers. In V,G,Duffy(Ed.), Advances in human factors, ergonomics and safety in manufacturing and service industries (pp. 986-997). CRC Press; 1st Edition.
  28. F. Wijnhoven & O. Bloemen. (2014). External validity of sentiment mining reports: Can current methods identify demographic biases, event biases, and manipulation of reviews?. Decision Support Systems, 59, 262-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2013.12.005
  29. G. I. Goo. (2013. 5. 9). Why did the NIS post comments on Oyu. Dong-A ilbo. http://www.donga.com/news/InfoGraphics/View/article/all/20130509/55044420/9
  30. P. DiMaggio, M. Nag & D. Blei. (2013). Exploiting affinities between topic modeling and the sociological perspective on culture: Application to newspaper coverage of US government arts funding. Poetics, 41(6), 570-606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2013.08.004
  31. G. U. Gu. (2019. 4. 27). The SUV's in the super age. Sedaily.com. https://www.sedaily.com/NewsVIew/1VI10XF1YR
  32. C. Sievert & K. Shirley. (2014). LDAvis: A method for visualizing and interpreting topics. Proceedings of the Workshop on Interactive Language Learning, Visualization, and Interfaces (pp.63-70). Baltimore, Maryland, USA. DOI : 10.3115/v1/W14-3110