IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v11y2021i1p21582440211003084.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tweets and Quacks: Network and Content Analyses of Providers of Non-Science-Based Anticancer Treatments and Their Supporters on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Anita Lavorgna
  • Leslie Carr

Abstract

Despite the consensus in the medical discipline that certain treatments lack scientific evidence and are worthless if not potentially dangerous, the promotion and selling of fake cures advertised as safe and effective has long plagued health care systems, praying on vulnerable patients and their loved ones. The web and social media are now playing a fundamental role in the propagation of non-science-based treatments and fraudulent medical claims, and in the rise of false health and lifestyle experts. This study combines criminological and computer science expertise to explore and critically analyze the Twitter presence of providers of non-science-based anticancer treatments and their active supporters in the English-speaking online community to investigate their structural relationships and to analyze the characteristics of the most popular actors. The features of the social network observed indicate that there is not a stable community of promoters and supporters of non-science-based medical treatments in the Twittersphere, suggesting the lack of a defined subculture and the presence of transient collectives rather than identifiable groups. Nonetheless, it is possible to observe dynamic conversational networks clustering around popular actors, tweets, and themes, prompting avenues for further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Anita Lavorgna & Leslie Carr, 2021. "Tweets and Quacks: Network and Content Analyses of Providers of Non-Science-Based Anticancer Treatments and Their Supporters on Twitter," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(1), pages 21582440211, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:21582440211003084
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440211003084
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440211003084
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440211003084?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Avnika B. Amin & Robert A. Bednarczyk & Cara E. Ray & Kala J. Melchiori & Jesse Graham & Jeffrey R. Huntsinger & Saad B. Omer, 2017. "Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(12), pages 873-880, December.
    2. Blume, Stuart, 2006. "Anti-vaccination movements and their interpretations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 628-642, February.
    3. Pedersen, Inge Kryger, 2013. "‘It can do no harm’: Body maintenance and modification in alternative medicine acknowledged as a non risk health regimen," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 56-62.
    4. Halford, Susan & Savage, Mike, 2017. "Speaking sociologically with big data: symphonic social science and the future for big data research," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87236, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    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. Advani, Arun, 2021. "Missing Incomes in the UK : Evidence and Policy Implications," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 1364, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
    2. Manca, Terra, 2018. "Fear, rationality, and risky others: A qualitative analysis of physicians' and nurses' accounts of popular vaccine narratives," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 119-125.
    3. Claudy, Marius C. & Parkinson, Mary & Aquino, Karl, 2024. "Why should innovators care about morality? Political ideology, moral foundations, and the acceptance of technological innovations," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    4. Jamison, Amelia M. & Quinn, Sandra Crouse & Freimuth, Vicki S., 2019. "“You don't trust a government vaccine”: Narratives of institutional trust and influenza vaccination among African American and white adults," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 221(C), pages 87-94.
    5. Mariangela Vespa & Timo Kortsch & Jan Hildebrand & Petra Schweizer-Ries & Sara Alida Volkmer, 2022. "Not All Places Are Equal: Using Instagram to Understand Cognitions and Affect towards Renewable Energy Infrastructures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-19, March.
    6. Vulpe, Simona - Nicoleta & Rughinis, Cosima, 2021. "Social amplification of risk and “probable vaccine damage”:A typology of vaccination beliefs in 28 European countries," MPRA Paper 105949, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Attwell, Katie & Ward, Paul R. & Meyer, Samantha B. & Rokkas, Philippa J. & Leask, Julie, 2018. "“Do-it-yourself”: Vaccine rejection and complementary and alternative medicine (CAM)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 106-114.
    8. Skea, Zoë C. & Entwistle, Vikki A. & Watt, Ian & Russell, Elizabeth, 2008. "'Avoiding harm to others' considerations in relation to parental measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination discussions - An analysis of an online chat forum," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 67(9), pages 1382-1390, November.
    9. Mühlhoff, Katharina, 2022. "Convincing the “Herd” of immunity: Lessons from smallpox vaccination in 19th century Germany," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 47(C).
    10. Callaghan, Timothy & Motta, Matthew & Sylvester, Steven & Lunz Trujillo, Kristin & Blackburn, Christine Crudo, 2019. "Parent psychology and the decision to delay childhood vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 238(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Kay Fullenkamp, Natalie, 2021. "Playing Russian roulette with their kids: Experts' construction of ignorance in the California and Ohio measles outbreaks," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).
    12. Buckman, Cierra & Liu, Indran C. & Cortright, Lindsay & Tumin, Dmitry & Syed, Salma, 2020. "The influence of local political trends on childhood vaccine completion in North Carolina," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    13. Anat Gofen, 2015. "Reconciling policy dissonance: patterns of governmental response to policy noncompliance," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(1), pages 3-24, March.
    14. Ward, Jeremy K., 2016. "Rethinking the antivaccine movement concept: A case study of public criticism of the swine flu vaccine’s safety in France," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 48-57.
    15. Daphne Bussink-Voorend & Jeannine L. A. Hautvast & Lisa Vandeberg & Olga Visser & Marlies E. J. L. Hulscher, 2022. "A systematic literature review to clarify the concept of vaccine hesitancy," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(12), pages 1634-1648, December.
    16. Reddinger, J. Lucas & Charness, Gary & Levine, David, 2024. "Vaccination as personal public-good provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 481-499.
    17. Jordan Luttrell-Freeman & Timothy J. Bungum & Jennifer R. Pharr, 2021. "A Systematic Review of the Rationale for Vaccine Hesitancy among American Parents," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(8), pages 1-77, August.
    18. Garrety, Karin & McLoughlin, Ian & Wilson, Rob & Zelle, Gregor & Martin, Mike, 2014. "National electronic health records and the digital disruption of moral orders," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 70-77.
    19. Vulpe, Simona - Nicoleta & Rughinis, Cosima, 2021. "The alternative fact of “probable vaccine damage”: A typology of vaccination beliefs in 28 European countries," MPRA Paper 105647, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Lawrence C. Hamilton & Joel Hartter & Kei Saito, 2015. "Trust in Scientists on Climate Change and Vaccines," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, August.

    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:sae:sagope:v:11:y:2021:i:1:p:21582440211003084. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.