Cargando…

Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades

With the emergence and rapid proliferation of social media platforms and social networking sites, recent years have witnessed a surge of misinformation spreading in our daily life. Drawing on a large-scale dataset which covers more than 1.4M posts and 18M comments from an online social media platfor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zhang, Yafei, Wang, Lin, Zhu, Jonathan J. H., Wang, Xiaofan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33526966
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11280-021-00862-x
_version_ 1783643481763217408
author Zhang, Yafei
Wang, Lin
Zhu, Jonathan J. H.
Wang, Xiaofan
author_facet Zhang, Yafei
Wang, Lin
Zhu, Jonathan J. H.
Wang, Xiaofan
author_sort Zhang, Yafei
collection PubMed
description With the emergence and rapid proliferation of social media platforms and social networking sites, recent years have witnessed a surge of misinformation spreading in our daily life. Drawing on a large-scale dataset which covers more than 1.4M posts and 18M comments from an online social media platform, we investigate the propagation of two distinct narratives–(i) conspiracy information, whose claims are generally unsubstantiated and thus referred as misinformation to some extent, and (ii) scientific information, whose origins are generally readily identifiable and verifiable. We find that conspiracy cascades tend to propagate in a multigenerational branching process whereas science cascades are more likely to grow in a breadth-first manner. Specifically, conspiracy information triggers larger cascades, involves more users and generations, persists longer, and is more viral and bursty than science information. Content analysis reveals that conspiracy cascades contain more negative words and emotional words which convey anger, fear, disgust, surprise and trust. We also find that conspiracy cascades are much more concerned with political and controversial topics. After applying machine learning models, we achieve an AUC score of nearly 90% in discriminating conspiracy from science narratives using the constructed features. We further investigate user’s role during the growth of cascades. In contrast with previous assumption that misinformation is primarily driven by a small set of users, we find that conspiracy cascades are more likely to be controlled by a broader set of users than science cascades, imposing new challenges on the management of misinformation. Although political affinity is thought to affect the consumption of misinformation, there is very little evidence that political orientation of the information source plays a role during the propagation of conspiracy information; Instead, we find that conspiracy information from media outlets with left or right orientation triggers smaller cascades and is less viral than information from online social media platforms (e.g., Twitter and Imgur) whose political orientations are unclear. Our study provides complementing evidence to current misinformation research and has practical policy implications to stem the propagation and mitigate the influence of misinformation online.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7839941
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78399412021-01-28 Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades Zhang, Yafei Wang, Lin Zhu, Jonathan J. H. Wang, Xiaofan World Wide Web Article With the emergence and rapid proliferation of social media platforms and social networking sites, recent years have witnessed a surge of misinformation spreading in our daily life. Drawing on a large-scale dataset which covers more than 1.4M posts and 18M comments from an online social media platform, we investigate the propagation of two distinct narratives–(i) conspiracy information, whose claims are generally unsubstantiated and thus referred as misinformation to some extent, and (ii) scientific information, whose origins are generally readily identifiable and verifiable. We find that conspiracy cascades tend to propagate in a multigenerational branching process whereas science cascades are more likely to grow in a breadth-first manner. Specifically, conspiracy information triggers larger cascades, involves more users and generations, persists longer, and is more viral and bursty than science information. Content analysis reveals that conspiracy cascades contain more negative words and emotional words which convey anger, fear, disgust, surprise and trust. We also find that conspiracy cascades are much more concerned with political and controversial topics. After applying machine learning models, we achieve an AUC score of nearly 90% in discriminating conspiracy from science narratives using the constructed features. We further investigate user’s role during the growth of cascades. In contrast with previous assumption that misinformation is primarily driven by a small set of users, we find that conspiracy cascades are more likely to be controlled by a broader set of users than science cascades, imposing new challenges on the management of misinformation. Although political affinity is thought to affect the consumption of misinformation, there is very little evidence that political orientation of the information source plays a role during the propagation of conspiracy information; Instead, we find that conspiracy information from media outlets with left or right orientation triggers smaller cascades and is less viral than information from online social media platforms (e.g., Twitter and Imgur) whose political orientations are unclear. Our study provides complementing evidence to current misinformation research and has practical policy implications to stem the propagation and mitigate the influence of misinformation online. Springer US 2021-01-27 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC7839941/ /pubmed/33526966 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11280-021-00862-x Text en © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC part of Springer Nature 2021 This article is made available via the PMC Open Access Subset for unrestricted research re-use and secondary analysis in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for the duration of the World Health Organization (WHO) declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
spellingShingle Article
Zhang, Yafei
Wang, Lin
Zhu, Jonathan J. H.
Wang, Xiaofan
Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title_full Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title_fullStr Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title_full_unstemmed Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title_short Conspiracy vs science: A large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
title_sort conspiracy vs science: a large-scale analysis of online discussion cascades
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839941/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33526966
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11280-021-00862-x
work_keys_str_mv AT zhangyafei conspiracyvssciencealargescaleanalysisofonlinediscussioncascades
AT wanglin conspiracyvssciencealargescaleanalysisofonlinediscussioncascades
AT zhujonathanjh conspiracyvssciencealargescaleanalysisofonlinediscussioncascades
AT wangxiaofan conspiracyvssciencealargescaleanalysisofonlinediscussioncascades