Table 1.
Videos and comment posts.
| Videos | Total comment posts | Comment posts included in samplea |
|---|---|---|
| 1. “Female genital cutting” (1) | 116 | 30 |
| 2. “Don’t call it mutilation” Tucker can’t believe this female circumcisions advocate | 105 | 28 |
| 3. “Afar Tribe: circumcision—tribal wives” | 101 | 25 |
| 4. “Female genital cutting” (2) | 75 | 22 |
| 5. “American woman who underwent female genital mutilation comes forward to help others” | 62 | 16 |
| 6. “End female genital mutilation: join the guardian’s campaign” | 49 | 13 |
| 7. “Female genital mutilation in Egypt” | 38 | 8 |
| 8. “Female circumcision” | 29 | 8 |
| 575 | 150 |
a
The amount of sample comment posts from each video is proportional to the total comment posts and the total sample required, with 10 additional posts randomly selected from the remaining comment posts. The sample posts were selected through stratified systematic sampling; for instance, every fourth post was selected under video 1, while every third post was selected under video 3.