Literature DB >> 29590045

The spread of true and false news online.

Soroush Vosoughi1, Deb Roy1, Sinan Aral2.   

Abstract

We investigated the differential diffusion of all of the verified true and false news stories distributed on Twitter from 2006 to 2017. The data comprise ~126,000 stories tweeted by ~3 million people more than 4.5 million times. We classified news as true or false using information from six independent fact-checking organizations that exhibited 95 to 98% agreement on the classifications. Falsehood diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects were more pronounced for false political news than for false news about terrorism, natural disasters, science, urban legends, or financial information. We found that false news was more novel than true news, which suggests that people were more likely to share novel information. Whereas false stories inspired fear, disgust, and surprise in replies, true stories inspired anticipation, sadness, joy, and trust. Contrary to conventional wisdom, robots accelerated the spread of true and false news at the same rate, implying that false news spreads more than the truth because humans, not robots, are more likely to spread it.
Copyright © 2018 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.

Entities:  

Year:  2018        PMID: 29590045     DOI: 10.1126/science.aap9559

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Science        ISSN: 0036-8075            Impact factor:   47.728


  315 in total

Review 1.  Machine behaviour.

Authors:  Iyad Rahwan; Manuel Cebrian; Nick Obradovich; Josh Bongard; Jean-François Bonnefon; Cynthia Breazeal; Jacob W Crandall; Nicholas A Christakis; Iain D Couzin; Matthew O Jackson; Nicholas R Jennings; Ece Kamar; Isabel M Kloumann; Hugo Larochelle; David Lazer; Richard McElreath; Alan Mislove; David C Parkes; Alex 'Sandy' Pentland; Margaret E Roberts; Azim Shariff; Joshua B Tenenbaum; Michael Wellman
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Believability of evidence matters for correcting social impressions.

Authors:  Jeremy Cone; Kathryn Flaharty; Melissa J Ferguson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-04-29       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 3.  Understanding the use of digital technology to promote human papillomavirus vaccination - A RE-AIM framework approach.

Authors:  Ashley B Stephens; Chelsea S Wynn; Melissa S Stockwell
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Detecting and modelling real percolation and phase transitions of information on social media.

Authors:  Jiarong Xie; Fanhui Meng; Jiachen Sun; Xiao Ma; Gang Yan; Yanqing Hu
Journal:  Nat Hum Behav       Date:  2021-04-01

5.  Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news.

Authors:  Dietram A Scheufele; Nicole M Krause
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-01-14       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 6.  Scientific integrity issues in Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry: Improving research reproducibility, credibility, and transparency.

Authors:  Christopher A Mebane; John P Sumpter; Anne Fairbrother; Thomas P Augspurger; Timothy J Canfield; William L Goodfellow; Patrick D Guiney; Anne LeHuray; Lorraine Maltby; David B Mayfield; Michael J McLaughlin; Lisa S Ortego; Tamar Schlekat; Richard P Scroggins; Tim A Verslycke
Journal:  Integr Environ Assess Manag       Date:  2019-02-28       Impact factor: 2.992

7.  Measuring algorithmically infused societies.

Authors:  Claudia Wagner; Markus Strohmaier; Alexandra Olteanu; Emre Kıcıman; Noshir Contractor; Tina Eliassi-Rad
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  It is time for Turkish Cardiologists to start engaging on Twitter.

Authors:  Göksel Çinier; Taylan Akgün; Tina Baykaner; Bulent Mutlu
Journal:  Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars       Date:  2019-09

9.  Studying human attention on the Internet.

Authors:  David Lazer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-12-17       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Eliciting preferences for truth-telling in a survey of politicians.

Authors:  Katharina A Janezic; Aina Gallego
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2020-08-24       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.