IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i4p3284-d1067032.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Social Bots’ Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Yaming Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    Internet Plus and Industrial Development Research Center, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Wenjie Song

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    Internet Plus and Industrial Development Research Center, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Jiang Shao

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Majed Abbas

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Jiaqi Zhang

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    Internet Plus and Industrial Development Research Center, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Yaya H. Koura

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    School of Foreign Languages, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

  • Yanyuan Su

    (School of Economics and Management, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China
    Internet Plus and Industrial Development Research Center, Yanshan University, Qinhuangdao 066004, China)

Abstract

Social bots have already infiltrated social media platforms, such as Twitter, Facebook, and so on. Exploring the role of social bots in discussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as comparing the behavioral differences between social bots and humans, is an important foundation for studying public health opinion dissemination. We collected data on Twitter and used Botometer to classify users into social bots and humans. Machine learning methods were used to analyze the characteristics of topic semantics, sentiment attributes, dissemination intentions, and interaction patterns of humans and social bots. The results show that 22% of these accounts were social bots, while 78% were humans, and there are significant differences in the behavioral characteristics between them. Social bots are more concerned with the topics of public health news than humans are with individual health and daily lives. More than 85% of bots’ tweets are liked, and they have a large number of followers and friends, which means they have influence on internet users’ perceptions about disease transmission and public health. In addition, social bots, located mainly in Europe and America countries, create an “authoritative” image by posting a lot of news, which in turn gains more attention and has a significant effect on humans. The findings contribute to understanding the behavioral patterns of new technologies such as social bots and their role in the dissemination of public health information.

Suggested Citation

  • Yaming Zhang & Wenjie Song & Jiang Shao & Majed Abbas & Jiaqi Zhang & Yaya H. Koura & Yanyuan Su, 2023. "Social Bots’ Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion on Twitter," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-21, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3284-:d:1067032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3284/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3284/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles Cho & Martin Martens & Hakkyun Kim & Michelle Rodrigue, 2011. "Astroturfing Global Warming: It Isn’t Always Greener on the Other Side of the Fence," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 104(4), pages 571-587, December.
    2. Chengcheng Shao & Pik-Mai Hui & Lei Wang & Xinwen Jiang & Alessandro Flammini & Filippo Menczer & Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, 2018. "Anatomy of an online misinformation network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(4), pages 1-23, April.
    3. Adam Badawy & Emilio Ferrara, 2018. "The rise of Jihadist propaganda on social networks," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 1(2), pages 453-470, September.
    4. repec:nas:journl:v:115:y:2018:p:12435-12440 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Joshua Uyheng & Kathleen M. Carley, 2020. "Bots and online hate during the COVID-19 pandemic: case studies in the United States and the Philippines," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 445-468, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Anna Ruelens, 2022. "Analyzing user-generated content using natural language processing: a case study of public satisfaction with healthcare systems," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 731-749, May.
    2. Sandra Wankmüller, 2023. "A comparison of approaches for imbalanced classification problems in the context of retrieving relevant documents for an analysis," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 91-163, April.
    3. Bartosz Wilczek, 2020. "Misinformation and herd behavior in media markets: A cross-national investigation of how tabloids’ attention to misinformation drives broadsheets’ attention to misinformation in political and business," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-22, November.
    4. Mireille Chiroleu‐Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2020. "Merchants of doubt: Corporate political action when NGO credibility is uncertain," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 439-461, April.
    5. Hayagreeva Rao & Sunasir Dutta, 2018. "Why Great Strategies Spring from Identity Movements," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(1), pages 313-322, March.
    6. Mireille Chiroleu-Assouline & Thomas P. Lyon, 2016. "Merchants of Doubt: Corporate Political Influence when Expert Credibility is Uncertain," Working Papers 2016.28, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    7. Susana C. Esper & Luciano Barin-Cruz & Jean-Pascal Gond, 2024. "Engaging Stakeholders During Intergovernmental Conflict: How Political Attributions Shape Stakeholder Engagement," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 191(1), pages 1-27, April.
    8. Wentao Xu & Kazutoshi Sasahara, 2022. "Characterizing the roles of bots on Twitter during the COVID-19 infodemic," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 591-609, May.
    9. Francesca Bolla Tripodi, 2022. "ReOpen demands as public health threat: a sociotechnical framework for understanding the stickiness of misinformation," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 321-334, December.
    10. Emilio Ferrara & Stefano Cresci & Luca Luceri, 2020. "Misinformation, manipulation, and abuse on social media in the era of COVID-19," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 271-277, November.
    11. James Flamino & Alessandro Galeazzi & Stuart Feldman & Michael W. Macy & Brendan Cross & Zhenkun Zhou & Matteo Serafino & Alexandre Bovet & Hernán A. Makse & Boleslaw K. Szymanski, 2023. "Political polarization of news media and influencers on Twitter in the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 904-916, June.
    12. Joshua Uyheng & Lynnette Hui Xian Ng & Kathleen M. Carley, 2021. "Active, aggressive, but to little avail: characterizing bot activity during the 2020 Singaporean elections," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 27(3), pages 324-342, September.
    13. Elgaaied-Gambier, Leila & Mandler, Timo, 2021. "Me trying to talk about sustainability: Exploring the psychological and social implications of environmental threats through user-generated content," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    14. Zixuan Weng & Aijun Lin, 2022. "Public Opinion Manipulation on Social Media: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Bots during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-17, December.
    15. Kai-Cheng Yang & Emilio Ferrara & Filippo Menczer, 2022. "Botometer 101: social bot practicum for computational social scientists," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(2), pages 1511-1528, November.
    16. C. Lakshman & Aarti Ramaswami & Ruth Alas & Jean Kabongo & J. Rajendran Pandian, 2014. "Ethics Trumps Culture? A Cross-National Study of Business Leader Responsibility for Downsizing and CSR Perceptions," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 125(1), pages 101-119, November.
    17. Grolleau, Gilles & Mzoughi, Naoufel & Peterson, Deborah & Tendero, Marjorie, 2022. "Changing the world with words? Euphemisms in climate change issues," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    18. Coche, Eugénie, 2018. "Privatised enforcement and the right to freedom of expression in a world confronted with terrorism propaganda online," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 7(4), pages 1-17.
    19. Vicente Javier Clemente-Suárez & Eduardo Navarro-Jiménez & Libertad Moreno-Luna & María Concepción Saavedra-Serrano & Manuel Jimenez & Juan Antonio Simón & Jose Francisco Tornero-Aguilera, 2021. "The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Social, Health, and Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-25, June.
    20. Lakshman Chandrashekhar & Linh Chi Vo & Rani S. Ladha, 2015. "Equity Portfolio Incentives to CEOs for Downsizing: Differential impacts on survivors vs. victims in three countries," Working papers 169, Indian Institute of Management Kozhikode.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3284-:d:1067032. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.