2022
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0261768
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Twitter and Facebook posts about COVID-19 are less likely to spread misinformation compared to other health topics

Abstract: The COVID-19 pandemic brought widespread attention to an “infodemic” of potential health misinformation. This claim has not been assessed based on evidence. We evaluated if health misinformation became more common during the pandemic. We gathered about 325 million posts sharing URLs from Twitter and Facebook during the beginning of the pandemic (March 8-May 1, 2020) compared to the same period in 2019. We relied on source credibility as an accepted proxy for misinformation across this database. Human annotator… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
23
0
1

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
1
23
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…To account for group-level effects we present a number of sensitivity analyses, and note that our findings are consistent over two geographical scales. Our source-based approach to detect misinformation at scale might not capture the totality of misleading and harmful content related to vaccines, and many low-credibility sources publish a mixture of false and true information 39 , 40 . Our results are also limited to a small period of time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To account for group-level effects we present a number of sensitivity analyses, and note that our findings are consistent over two geographical scales. Our source-based approach to detect misinformation at scale might not capture the totality of misleading and harmful content related to vaccines, and many low-credibility sources publish a mixture of false and true information 39 , 40 . Our results are also limited to a small period of time.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The first part addressed the extraction of health-related tweets using the model proposed in our previous study [ 31 ]. In that study, we used a health lexicon that focused more on general health keywords rather than specific outbreaks, as a recent study suggested that general health misinformation is more likely to spread than, for example, COVID-19 [ 40 ]. In contrast, Table 1 illustrates that most studies in this area focused on a specific domain or disease outbreak.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Building on this evidence, the data we present is a pilot study investigating the following research questions: (1) to what extent does misinformation with narrative elaboration about COVID-19 affect believability in misinformation; (2) to what extent does misinformation with narrative elaboration about COVID-19 affect willingness to share information online; (3) to what extent does the effect of misinformation with narrative elaboration about COVID-19 differ by age. We hypothesized that narrative elaboration would increase believability and willingness to share misinformation about COVID-19, in particular in younger adults.…”
Section: Open Accessmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Misinformation is broadly understood an umbrella term to include all false or inaccurate information that is spread in social media [1]. Since the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in 2020 online platforms have been awash with COVID-19 pandemic-related information, however these are often abound with misinformation containing content which is misleading or false [2] (see [3] for an evaluation of online source credibility). Thus, the influence of misinformation is highly impactive as differences in believability between credible content and misinformation can cause a split between scientific consensus and public opinion [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%