StreetTalk: exploring energy insecurity in New York City using a novel street intercept interview and social media dissemination method

The study addresses how to modernize qualitative research and rapidly disseminate findings by leveraging social media while exploring perceptions and experiences of energy insecurity among NYC residents. Social media has transformed communication, collaboration, and research dissemination, yet qualitative research typically relies on lengthy, in-depth interviews with slower publication timelines. The authors developed StreetTalk, a short-form, street intercept interview method designed for rapid data collection and social media-ready dissemination to reduce lag between research and public understanding. Focusing on NYC provides a context with distinctive housing stock, centralized heating control in many buildings, widespread reliance on window ACs, aging infrastructure, and stark inequalities that heighten risks of energy insecurity. Prior work indicates energy insecurity affects roughly a third of U.S. households and about 28% of NYC residents, with higher risks among low-income households, renters, households with children, Black and Latine residents, and those facing poor building conditions. The study’s purpose is to (1) introduce the StreetTalk method, (2) ground-truth public perceptions of energy insecurity across NYC’s diverse populations in public spaces, and (3) demonstrate rapid, public-facing dissemination via social media.

The paper situates StreetTalk within literature on social media’s societal and scientific roles, including benefits for collaboration, visibility, recruitment, and public opinion analysis, alongside risks like misinformation and reduced in-person interaction. Traditional qualitative methods provide depth but have limitations such as time burdens, thematic condensation, and delayed dissemination. Energy insecurity research internationally is more mature than in the U.S., where gaps persist in understanding everyday dynamics of affordability, access, and quality. NYC-specific literature documents a 28% prevalence of energy insecurity and associations with adverse health outcomes (mental, respiratory, cardiovascular), with disproportionate burdens on disadvantaged groups (Black/Latine residents, low-income households, renters, households with children, long-term neighborhood residents, foreign-born individuals). Qualitative studies have explored low-income contexts (e.g., Bronx; New Haven; southeastern U.S.), but prior work has not examined public-domain, cross-demographic perspectives using street intercept video shared in non-academic outlets. The authors therefore propose StreetTalk to address methodological and dissemination gaps while complementing and expanding the U.S. energy insecurity evidence base.

Design and approach: StreetTalk is a social media–adapted qualitative, street intercept interview method enabling rapid, public-facing data collection and dissemination. The study explores energy insecurity perceptions among NYC residents through brief, on-the-street interviews, recorded (audio/video) with consent and later edited into social media shorts. Research team: A diverse, multidisciplinary team (epidemiology, environmental science, anthropology, sociology, statistics, public health, Africana studies, economics, health policy, medicine). The PI, a Latina sociologist/public health researcher and NYC native, has extensive energy insecurity research experience. Team members were also interviewed for training and reflexivity. Ethics and consent: Approved by Columbia University Irving Medical Center IRB [IRB AAAU3071]. Standard informed consent was supplemented with a media release form. Participants received a $10 gift certificate. Participants could opt out or redact statements at any time. Sampling and setting: In April 2023, researchers conducted street intercept recruitment and interviews at recognizable, diverse NYC locations across all five boroughs (e.g., Yankee Stadium, 125th Street, Prospect Park, Staten Island Ferry; neighborhoods in Manhattan, Bronx, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten Island). Eligibility required current residence in one of NYC’s five boroughs and experience of at least one energy insecurity indicator. Data collection: Teams of 2–3 approached passersby in public outdoor spaces (sidewalks, bus stops, parks). After eligibility and consent/media release, 10–15 minute interviews were conducted in English or Spanish (per participant preference), audio/video recorded as preferred. A semi-structured guide covered household energy experiences, thermal comfort (winter/summer), reactions to utility bills, tips for saving energy, outages, and desired changes (Table 1). Participants could choose not to appear on social media (e.g., audio-only, non-identifying filming) while still contributing to analysis and content. Analysis: Following an interpretivist paradigm, the team used Braun and Clarke’s six-phase thematic analysis via a codebook approach. Six trained team members completed phases 1–3 on a subset, calibrated coding, then double-coded all interviews with consensus meetings. The full team refined and named themes (phases 4–5) and produced the report (phase 6). Themes and sub-themes are presented (Table 2). Dissemination: A dedicated team managed @hotandcold_nyc across TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, and YouTube. Interview clips were edited into short-form videos highlighting themes, scheduled via a social media calendar, and accompanied by captions. Engagement analytics were monitored to iteratively optimize production and maximize reach.

Sample and data collection: From April 10–28, 2023, 31 interviews (34 participants) were recorded (3 additional interviews were not recorded and excluded). Borough distribution: 15 Manhattan, 5 Brooklyn, 4 Bronx, 5 Queens, 2 Staten Island. Five interviews were conducted in Spanish; the sample was socio-demographically diverse (no formal sociodemographic survey collected). Six major themes emerged: 1) Conservation and trade-offs: Participants described balancing thermal comfort and financial security, often restricting AC/heating use, spending time outside the home, or using space heaters when landlord-provided heat was insufficient. Many adopted vigilant conservation behaviors (e.g., lights off, unplugging devices), sometimes attributing spikes to personal behavior and emphasizing responsibility. 2) Housing deficiencies and inefficiencies: Outdated appliances, poor insulation, inadequate or nonfunctional heating systems, insufficient electrical capacity (e.g., ACs tripping breakers) and building/window characteristics hindered comfort and increased costs. Higher floors were linked to overheating in summer; some resorted to stoves/ovens or space heaters when heat failed. 3) Thermal agency: Control over indoor temperature varied from none to full. Satisfaction correlated with control; lack of control—especially building-controlled heat—was frustrating. Unresponsive landlords were a common barrier; some called 311 to seek enforcement. Greater thermal agency (e.g., central AC, heat pumps) can improve comfort but may shift costs to tenants. 4) Response to the bill: Participants reported negative emotions (stress, frustration, fear of shutoff) and observed recent bill increases (e.g., ~$90 to >$200/month). Subthemes included emotional responses, renewed conservation efforts, and perceptions of inconsistent pricing misaligned with usage (e.g., bills not dropping despite reduced use or absence from home), fueling skepticism toward utilities. 5) Disappointment and distrust in energy-related processes and oversight: Many perceived insufficient support, transparency, and enforcement by utilities and government. Participants called for stronger oversight of heating requirements, better assistance programs, and clearer information. Lack of awareness of existing aid programs hindered access. 6) Desire for and barriers to clean energy adoption: Participants expressed interest in renewables (especially solar) due to climate and health concerns but cited barriers: rental status, upfront costs, perceived reliability issues, long payback times, and higher rates for renewable options. Some misconceptions were evident (e.g., solar reliability; 30-year payback), indicating a need for energy literacy. Social media dissemination outcomes: Within the first year, nearly 200,000 cumulative views/impressions across platforms. As of July 28, 2024: YouTube ~88,795 views; Instagram ~41,730; TikTok >47,285; Facebook ~1,225; with thousands of likes/comments, demonstrating substantial public engagement with research outputs.

StreetTalk rapidly captured public-facing qualitative insights on energy insecurity in NYC and disseminated them widely. The findings corroborate prior research showing common trade-offs, vigilant conservation, and the role of housing quality in limiting comfort and inflating costs. They extend the literature by foregrounding thermal agency as a salient dimension of household experience, documenting emotional burdens tied to billing and shutoff threats, and highlighting perceived procedural injustices (pricing opacity, weak enforcement) and strong but constrained interest in clean energy. The observed misconceptions around solar economics and reliability underscore the importance of energy literacy and transparent pricing information to build trust and empower consumers. Methodologically, StreetTalk demonstrates that short-form, street intercept interviews paired with social media can reduce lag times, broaden audiences, and humanize research topics via relatable, visual narratives. Practically, the themes point to policy and program opportunities: improving landlord accountability and building performance; expanding and publicizing energy assistance; enhancing billing transparency; and lowering barriers to renewable adoption for renters and low-income households. Future work should deepen analysis of thermal agency and coping behaviors, examine power dynamics between tenants/landlords/utilities/regulators, and evaluate social media engagement (e.g., thematic analysis of comments) as a vehicle for public discourse and behavior change.

The study introduces StreetTalk, a short-form, street intercept qualitative method coupled with social media dissemination, and applies it to energy insecurity in NYC. Thematic analysis of brief interviews identified six key domains—conservation and trade-offs, housing deficiencies/inefficiencies, thermal agency, responses to bills, distrust in processes/oversight, and desire for but barriers to clean energy—that collectively illuminate how energy insecurity shapes daily life. StreetTalk effectively engaged diverse residents and achieved rapid, broad dissemination, helping bridge gaps between academic research and public understanding. The approach can reduce the time from data collection to public and policy impact and is adaptable to other topics and locales. Next steps include deeper, home-based interviews in NYC, expansion to other cities and issues, and systematic study of social media engagement to refine best practices and assess the method’s comparative effectiveness in stimulating informed public discourse.

StreetTalk’s brief, focused interviews limit depth relative to traditional in-depth qualitative methods; results are best viewed as ground-truthing to inform follow-up studies. Street-based, on-camera recruitment risks selection bias toward those comfortable speaking publicly and may exclude homebound or camera-averse individuals; while audio-only or non-identifying filming can mitigate this, participation biases remain. The small, non-random NYC sample limits generalizability to other contexts. There may also be temporal/contextual biases related to when and where intercepts were conducted. Nonetheless, the method is adaptable, and subsequent studies can expand sample diversity and depth through longer, home-based interviews and multi-city applications.