Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Digital Burnout Risk Classification Based on Doomscrolling and Fear of Missing Out Using the Mamdani Fuzzy Method Matelda Yunanta Ambon; Rosmasari; Fahrul Agus
Indonesian Journal of Data and Science Vol. 7 No. 2 (2026): Indonesian Journal of Data and Science
Publisher : yocto brain

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56705/ijodas.v7i2.442

Abstract

Intensive digital technology use among university students may trigger Digital Burnout, compounded by doom scrolling and Fear of Missing Out (FOMO). No systematic mechanism exists for automatically identifying students' Digital Burnout risk. This study classifies students' Digital Burnout levels into low, moderate, and high categories based on doom scrolling and FOMO. The Mamdani Fuzzy method was applied, with Doom scrolling and FOMO as inputs and Digital Burnout as the output, implemented in MATLAB Fuzzy Logic Toolbox. Data were collected from 414 students via an online self-report questionnaire, yielding 408 valid records (171 gamer, 237 general); all instruments were valid and reliable (Cronbach's Alpha: 0.947; 0.952; 0.964). Ground truth categories were derived from validated questionnaire scores, not clinical diagnosis or expert assessment. The system used nine IF–THEN rules with trapmf/trimf functions on [0,100] and centroid defuzzification, refined through twelve adjustment iterations.  Most students fell into the high Digital Burnout category (47.5%), followed by moderate (30.1%) and low (22.3%). The optimal configuration achieved 67.89% accuracy, with high precision but moderate recall for the High category (precision 0.9688, recall 0.6392), and higher accuracy for gamer (77.19%) than general respondents (61.18%). This study demonstrates the feasibility of combining doom scrolling and FOMO as Mamdani Fuzzy inputs for Digital Burnout risk classification. Given its moderate accuracy and reliance on self-reported rather than clinically validated labels, the model is an exploratory prototype rather than a validated screening instrument; further validation with independent samples and expert-reviewed rules is needed before practical application in student mental health services
Sentiment Classification Of TikTok Comments on The Free Nutritious Meal Program Using Multinomial Naïve Bayes Salom Sefanya Onibala; Rosmasari; Kezia Arum Sary
Indonesian Journal of Data and Science Vol. 7 No. 2 (2026): Indonesian Journal of Data and Science
Publisher : yocto brain

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56705/ijodas.v7i2.448

Abstract

TikTok has become an important platform for public discussion of government programs, including the Free Nutritious Meals (MBG) Program. The large volume of user comments makes manual analysis inefficient and motivates the use of automated sentiment classification. This study investigates public sentiment toward the MBG Program through comments collected from the official TikTok account of the National Nutrition Agency (@badangizinasional.ri). The study applies a pipeline consisting of text preprocessing, automatic sentiment labeling using the IndoRoBERTa sentiment-classification model, undersampling, TF-IDF feature extraction, and Multinomial Naïve Bayes classification. A total of 1,048 comments were collected, of which 1,028 remained after preprocessing. The IndoRoBERTa-based pseudo-labeling process assigned 333 comments (32.39%) to the positive class and 695 comments (67.61%) to the negative class. Because the class distribution was imbalanced, undersampling was applied, resulting in 666 comments consisting of 333 comments per class. Hyperparameter optimization using GridSearchCV with 5-fold cross-validation selected alpha = 0.5, max_df = 0.8, min_df = 3, ngram_range = (1,3), and sublinear_tf = False. On the 20% stratified test set, Multinomial Naïve Bayes achieved 80.60% accuracy, 81.04% precision, 80.60% recall, and 80.53% F1-score when evaluated against the IndoRoBERTa-generated labels. These results should be interpreted as agreement with automatically generated pseudo-labels rather than direct evidence of performance against human-verified ground truth. Therefore, the observed negative sentiment distribution reflects the original post-preprocessing dataset before undersampling, while the classifier was trained and tested on a balanced subset. Manual validation of the pseudo-labels and comparison with alternative classifiers are recommended for future work