Measuring exposure to misinformation from political elites on Twitter.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Mosleh M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9681735 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Nov
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Measuring exposure to misinformation from political elites on Twitter.
Mosleh Mohsen M Rand David G DG
Nature communications 20221121 1
Misinformation can come directly from public figures and organizations (referred to here as "elites"). Here, we develop a tool for measuring Twitter users' exposure to misinformation from elites based on the public figures and organizations they choose to follow. Using a database of professional fact-checks by PolitiFact, we calculate falsity scores for 816 elites based on the veracity of their statements. We then assign users an elite misinformation-exposure score based on the falsity scores of ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:We offer comprehensive evidence of preferences for ideological congruity when people engage with politicians, pundits, and news organizations on social media. Using 4 years of data (2016-2019) from a random sample of 1.5 million Twitter users, we examine three behaviors studied separately to date: (i) following of in-group versus out-group elites, (ii) sharing in-group versus out-group information (retweeting), and (iii) commenting on the shared information (quote tweeting). We find that the majority of users (60%) do not follow any political elites. Those who do follow in-group elite accounts at much higher rates than out-group accounts (90 versus 10%), share information from in-group elites 13 times more frequently than from out-group elites, and often add negative comments to the shared out-group information. Conservatives are twice as likely as liberals to share in-group versus out-group content. These patterns are robust, emerge across issues and political elites, and exist regardless of users' ideological extremity.
| S-EPMC9524832 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Increased sharing of untrustworthy information on social media platforms is one of the main challenges of our modern information society. Because information disseminated by political elites is known to shape citizen and media discourse, it is particularly important to examine the quality of information shared by politicians. Here, we show that from 2016 onward, members of the Republican Party in the US Congress have been increasingly sharing links to untrustworthy sources. The proportion of untrustworthy information posted by Republicans versus Democrats is diverging at an accelerating rate, and this divergence has worsened since President Biden was elected. This divergence between parties seems to be unique to the United States as it cannot be observed in other western democracies such as Germany and the United Kingdom, where left-right disparities are smaller and have remained largely constant.
| S-EPMC7613815 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study investigated the cognitive processing of true and false political information. Specifically, it examined the impact of source credibility on the assessment of veracity when information comes from a polarizing source (Experiment 1), and effectiveness of explanations when they come from one's own political party or an opposition party (Experiment 2). These experiments were conducted prior to the 2016 Presidential election. Participants rated their belief in factual and incorrect statements that President Trump made on the campaign trail; facts were subsequently affirmed and misinformation retracted. Participants then re-rated their belief immediately or after a delay. Experiment 1 found that (i) if information was attributed to Trump, Republican supporters of Trump believed it more than if it was presented without attribution, whereas the opposite was true for Democrats and (ii) although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation items following a correction, they did not change their voting preferences. Experiment 2 revealed that the explanation's source had relatively little impact, and belief updating was more influenced by perceived credibility of the individual initially purporting the information. These findings suggest that people use political figures as a heuristic to guide evaluation of what is true or false, yet do not necessarily insist on veracity as a prerequisite for supporting political candidates.
| S-EPMC5383823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesTo assess the effect of exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms found on Twitter on adult current smokers' intention to quit smoking cigarettes, intention to purchase e-cigarettes and perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes compared with regular cigarettes.SettingAn online randomised controlled experiment conducted in November 2019 among USA and UK current smokers.Participants2400 adult current smokers aged ≥18 years who were not current e-cigarette users recruited from an online panel. Participants' were randomised in a 1:1:1:1 ratio using a least-fill randomiser function.InterventionsViewing 4 tweets in random order within one of four conditions: (1) e-cigarettes are just as or more harmful than smoking, (2) e-cigarettes are completely harmless, (3) e-cigarette harms are uncertain, and (4) a control condition of tweets about physical activity.Primary outcomes measuresSelf-reported post-test intention to quit smoking cigarettes, intention to purchase e-cigarettes, and perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes compared with smoking.ResultsAmong US and UK participants, after controlling for baseline measures of the outcome, exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are as or more harmful than smoking versus control was associated with lower post-test intention to purchase e-cigarettes (β=-0.339, 95% CI -0.487 to -0.191, p<0.001) and increased post-test perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes (β=0.341, 95% CI 0.273 to 0.410, p<0.001). Among US smokers, exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are completely harmless was associated with higher post-test intention to purchase e-cigarettes (β=0.229, 95% CI 0.002 to 0.456, p=0.048) and lower post-test perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes (β=-0.154, 95% CI -0.258 to -0.050, p=0.004).ConclusionsUS and UK adult current smokers may be deterred from considering using e-cigarettes after brief exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes were just as or more harmful than smoking. Conversely, US adult current smokers may be encouraged to use e-cigarettes after exposure to tweets that e-cigarettes are completely harmless. These findings suggest that misinformation about e-cigarette harms may influence some adult smokers' decisions to consider using e-cigarettes.Trial registration numberISRCTN16082420.
| S-EPMC8413940 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Many people view news on social media, yet the production of news items online has come under fire because of the common spreading of misinformation. Social media platforms police their content in various ways. Primarily they rely on crowdsourced 'flags': users signal to the platform that a specific news item might be misleading and, if they raise enough of them, the item will be fact-checked. However, real-world data show that the most flagged news sources are also the most popular and-supposedly-reliable ones. In this paper, we show that this phenomenon can be explained by the unreasonable assumptions that current content policing strategies make about how the online social media environment is shaped. The most realistic assumption is that confirmation bias will prevent a user from flagging a news item if they share the same political bias as the news source producing it. We show, via agent-based simulations, that a model reproducing our current understanding of the social media environment will necessarily result in the most neutral and accurate sources receiving most flags.
| S-EPMC7328405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Popular dissatisfaction with representative democracy has encouraged governments and legislatures worldwide to experiment with democratic innovations. However, despite calls for a 'systemic' approach to the study of democratic engagement and participation, empirical knowledge is limited about the diffusion of democratic innovations within civil society, and, in particular, about the connective mechanisms that bring the 'voice' of citizens to the 'ears' of political elites. This article responds to this gap, presenting original empirical research examining the UK House of Commons' e-petitions system. This research maps public engagement with parliamentary e-petitions across a range of expressive spaces, and highlights the facilitative role of non-institutional intermediaries. However, it also underlines the predominant role of institutional actors in structuring public participation, and shows that effective transmission between the informal public and formal political spheres remains contingent on both 'designed-in powers' of institutional coupling and 'developed practices' of public engagement. Through this analysis, the article makes an important contribution to debates concerning democratic innovations, political participation, and institutional design.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1057/s41293-022-00208-9.
| S-EPMC9123609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Misinformation has been a pressing issue since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, threatening our ability to effectively act on the crisis. Nevertheless, little is known about the actual effects of fake news on behavioural intentions. Does exposure to or belief in misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines affect people's intentions to receive such a vaccine? This paper attempts to address this question via three preregistered experiments (N = 3463). In Study 1, participants (n = 1269) were exposed to fabricated pro- or anti-vaccine information or to neutral true information, and then asked about their intentions to get vaccinated. In Study 2, participants (n = 646) were exposed to true pro- and anti-vaccine information, while Study 3 (n = 1548) experimentally manipulated beliefs in novel misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines by increasing exposure to the information. The results of these three studies showed that exposure to false information about the vaccines had little effect on participants' intentions to get vaccinated, even when multiple exposures led them to believe the headlines to be more accurate. An exploratory meta-analysis of studies 1 and 3, with a combined sample size of 2683, showed that exposure to false information both supporting and opposing COVID-19 vaccines actually increased vaccination intentions, though the effect size was very small. We conclude by cautioning researchers against equating exposure to misinformation or perceived accuracy of false news with actual behaviours.
| S-EPMC9526535 | biostudies-literature
Project description:At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, fears grew that making vaccination a political (instead of public health) issue may impact the efficacy of this life-saving intervention, spurring the spread of vaccine-hesitant content. In this study, we examine whether there is a relationship between the political interest of social media users and their exposure to vaccine-hesitant content on Twitter. We focus on 17 European countries using a multilingual, longitudinal dataset of tweets spanning the period before COVID, up to the vaccine roll-out. We find that, in most countries, users' endorsement of vaccine-hesitant content is the highest in the early months of the pandemic, around the time of greatest scientific uncertainty. Further, users who follow politicians from right-wing parties, and those associated with authoritarian or anti-EU stances are more likely to endorse vaccine-hesitant content, whereas those following left-wing politicians, more pro-EU or liberal parties, are less likely. Somewhat surprisingly, politicians did not play an outsized role in the vaccine debates of their countries, receiving a similar number of retweets as other similarly popular users. This systematic, multi-country, longitudinal investigation of the connection of politics with vaccine hesitancy has important implications for public health policy and communication.
| S-EPMC10883931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccinations play a critical role in mitigating the impact of COVID-19 and other diseases. Past research has linked misinformation to increased hesitancy and lower vaccination rates. Gaps remain in our knowledge about the main drivers of vaccine misinformation on social media and effective ways to intervene.ObjectiveOur longitudinal study had two primary objectives: (1) to investigate the patterns of prevalence and contagion of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on Twitter in 2021, and (2) to identify the main spreaders of vaccine misinformation. Given our initial results, we further considered the likely drivers of misinformation and its spread, providing insights for potential interventions.MethodsWe collected almost 300 million English-language tweets related to COVID-19 vaccines using a list of over 80 relevant keywords over a period of 12 months. We then extracted and labeled news articles at the source level based on third-party lists of low-credibility and mainstream news sources, and measured the prevalence of different kinds of information. We also considered suspicious YouTube videos shared on Twitter. We focused our analysis of vaccine misinformation spreaders on verified and automated Twitter accounts.ResultsOur findings showed a relatively low prevalence of low-credibility information compared to the entirety of mainstream news. However, the most popular low-credibility sources had reshare volumes comparable to those of many mainstream sources, and had larger volumes than those of authoritative sources such as the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization. Throughout the year, we observed an increasing trend in the prevalence of low-credibility news about vaccines. We also observed a considerable amount of suspicious YouTube videos shared on Twitter. Tweets by a small group of approximately 800 "superspreaders" verified by Twitter accounted for approximately 35% of all reshares of misinformation on an average day, with the top superspreader (@RobertKennedyJr) responsible for over 13% of retweets. Finally, low-credibility news and suspicious YouTube videos were more likely to be shared by automated accounts.ConclusionsThe wide spread of misinformation around COVID-19 vaccines on Twitter during 2021 shows that there was an audience for this type of content. Our findings are also consistent with the hypothesis that superspreaders are driven by financial incentives that allow them to profit from health misinformation. Despite high-profile cases of deplatformed misinformation superspreaders, our results show that in 2021, a few individuals still played an outsized role in the spread of low-credibility vaccine content. As a result, social media moderation efforts would be better served by focusing on reducing the online visibility of repeat spreaders of harmful content, especially during public health crises.
| S-EPMC9970010 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has been occurring concurrently with an infodemic of misinformation about the virus. Spreading primarily on social media, there has been a significant academic effort to understand the English side of this infodemic. However, much less attention has been paid to the Arabic side.ObjectiveThere is an urgent need to examine the scale of Arabic COVID-19 disinformation. This study empirically examines how Arabic speakers use specific hashtags on Twitter to express antivaccine and antipandemic views to uncover trends in their social media usage. By exploring this topic, we aim to fill a gap in the literature that can help understand conspiracies in Arabic around COVID-19.MethodsThis study used content analysis to understand how 13 popular Arabic hashtags were used in antivaccine communities. We used Twitter Academic API v2 to search for the hashtags from the beginning of August 1, 2006, until October 10, 2021. After downloading a large data set from Twitter, we identified major categories or topics in the sample data set using emergent coding. Emergent coding was chosen because of its ability to inductively identify the themes that repeatedly emerged from the data set. Then, after revising the coding scheme, we coded the rest of the tweets and examined the results. In the second attempt and with a modified codebook, an acceptable intercoder agreement was reached (Krippendorff α≥.774).ResultsIn total, we found 476,048 tweets, mostly posted in 2021. First, the topic of infringing on civil liberties (n=483, 41.1%) covers ways that governments have allegedly infringed on civil liberties during the pandemic and unfair restrictions that have been imposed on unvaccinated individuals. Users here focus on topics concerning their civil liberties and freedoms, claiming that governments violated such rights following the pandemic. Notably, users denounce government efforts to force them to take any of the COVID-19 vaccines for different reasons. This was followed by vaccine-related conspiracies (n=476, 40.5%), including a Deep State dictating pandemic policies, mistrusting vaccine efficacy, and discussing unproven treatments. Although users tweeted about a range of different conspiracy theories, mistrusting the vaccine's efficacy, false or exaggerated claims about vaccine risks and vaccine-related diseases, and governments and pharmaceutical companies profiting from vaccines and intentionally risking the general public health appeared the most. Finally, calls for action (n=149, 12.6%) encourage individuals to participate in civil demonstrations. These calls range from protesting to encouraging other users to take action about the vaccine mandate. For each of these categories, we also attempted to trace the logic behind the different categories by exploring different types of conspiracy theories for each category.ConclusionsBased on our findings, we were able to identify 3 prominent topics that were prevalent amongst Arabic speakers on Twitter. These categories focused on violations of civil liberties by governments, conspiracy theories about the vaccines, and calls for action. Our findings also highlight the need for more research to better understand the impact of COVID-19 disinformation on the Arab world.
| S-EPMC9327499 | biostudies-literature