Misinformation more likely to use non-specific authority references: Twitter analysis of two COVID-19 myths

McGlynn, Joseph; Baryshevtsev, Maxim; Dayton, Zane A

doi:10.37016/mr-2020-37

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Indeed, extensive research has shown how information dissemination through social media creates an abundance of information accuracy challenges. [55][56][57][58]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Gut health’ and the microbiome in the popular press: a content analysis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveExtensive research and important discoveries on the microbiome have led to a growth in media coverage. This study explores how the microbiome has been portrayed in press sources popular among American and Canadian audiences.DesignContent analysis.MethodsUsing the FACTIVA Database, we compiled a finalised data set of (N=830) articles from press sources popular among American and Canadian audiences which were published between 1 January 2018 and 11 October 2019 and which contained at least one of the following search terms: ‘microbiome’, ‘microbiota’, ‘gut health’, ‘healthy gut’, ‘unhealthy gut’, ‘gut bacteria’, ‘probiotic’ or ‘probiotics.’ We performed content analysis on the articles to determine how often ideas of the microbiome were presented as beneficial, in which health contexts, and whether actions could be taken to reap stated benefits. We compared this portrayal of benefits with critical portrayals of the microbiome.ResultsAlmost all of the articles (94%) described health benefits associated with the microbiome with many (79%) describing actions which could be taken to reap stated benefits. Articles most often described health benefits in more broad, general context (34%) and most commonly outlined actions related to food/drug (45%) as well as probiotic (27%) intake. Only some articles (19%) provided microbiome-related critiques or limitations. Some of the articles (22%) were focused on highlighting specific research developments, and in these articles, critiques or limitations were more common.ConclusionsArticles discussing the microbiome published for American and Canadian audiences typically hype the microbiome’s impact and popularise gut health trends while only offering a little in the way of communicating microbiome science. Lifestyle choices including nutrition, taking probiotics, stress management and exercise are often promoted as means of reaping the microbiome-related health benefits. The trend of actionable ‘gut health’ is foregrounded over more evidence-based descriptions of microbiome science.

show abstract

“…Indeed, extensive research has shown how information dissemination through social media creates an abundance of information accuracy challenges. [55][56][57][58]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Gut health’ and the microbiome in the popular press: a content analysis

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…First, we think that it is important to consider whether people are receiving information directly from health experts like scientists, the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and prevention), the WHO, and doctors/experts online. As primary sources, these should be the most reliable sources of information about the pandemic, and research suggests that people who engage in debunking behavior on Twitter are more likely to cite specific and verifiable authorities like the CDC or WHO than those who are sharing misinformation (McGlynn et al, 2020). In general, we argue that people who report relying on more reliable information (in this case, health experts) should be (a) more likely to correct others, and (b) be less likely to be corrected themselves (H2).…”

Section: Sources Of Informationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Correction Experiences on Social Media During COVID-19

Bode

Vraga

2021

Social Media + Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite a wealth of research examining the effectiveness of correction of misinformation, not enough is known about how people experience such correction when it occurs on social media. Using a study of US adults in late March 2020, we measure how often people witness correction, correct others, or are corrected themselves, using the case of COVID-19 misinformation on social media. Descriptively, our results suggest that all three experiences related to correction on social media are relatively common and occur across partisan divides. Importantly, a majority of those who report seeing misinformation also report seeing it corrected, and a majority of those who report sharing misinformation report being corrected by others. Those with more education are more likely to engage in correction, and younger respondents are more likely to report all three experiences with correction. While experiences with correction are generally unrelated to misperceptions about COVID-19, those who correct others have higher COVID-19 misperceptions.

show abstract

“…Misinformation and authority reference. Authority reference is defined as referencing an individual or organization that possesses knowledge in a related field (McGlynn et al, 2020). Reference is an important message cue derived from the post's content.…”

Section: Misinformation and Feature Characterizing: How To Detect It?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McGlynn et al (2020) examined the difference in authority reference usage between COVID-19 misinformation tweets and debunking tweets. According to their study, misinformation tweets were more likely to use non-specific authority references, while debunking tweets used more specific or verifiable authority references (McGlynn et al, 2020). Hence, we propose our second research question as follows:…”

Section: Misinformation and Feature Characterizing: How To Detect It?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Characterizing the semantic features of climate change misinformation on Chinese social media

Chu

Zhu

2023

Public Underst Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change misinformation leads to significant adverse impacts and has become a global concern. Identifying misinformation and investigating its characteristics are of great importance to counteract misinformation. Therefore, this study aims to characterize the semantic features (frames and authority references) of climate change misinformation in the context of Chinese social media. Posts concerning climate change were collected from Weibo between January 2010 and December 2020. First, veracity, frames, and authority references were manually labeled. Then, we applied logistic regression to examine the relationship between information veracity and semantic features. The results revealed that posts concerning environmental and health impact and science and technology were more likely to be misinformation. Moreover, posts referencing non-specific authority sources are more likely to be misinformed than posts making no references to any authority references. This study provides a theoretical understanding of the semantic characteristics of climate change misinformation and practical suggestions for combating them.

show abstract

Misinformation more likely to use non-specific authority references: Twitter analysis of two COVID-19 myths

Cited by 8 publications

References 22 publications

‘Gut health’ and the microbiome in the popular press: a content analysis

‘Gut health’ and the microbiome in the popular press: a content analysis

Correction Experiences on Social Media During COVID-19

Characterizing the semantic features of climate change misinformation on Chinese social media

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About