IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/comaot/v27y2021i2d10.1007_s10588-019-09305-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An anatomical comparison of fake-news and trusted-news sharing pattern on Twitter

Author

Listed:
  • Sumeet Kumar

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Binxuan Huang

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Ramon Alfonso Villa Cox

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

  • Kathleen M. Carley

    (Carnegie Mellon University)

Abstract

Online social networks allow users to share a variety of multi-media content on the World Wide Web. The rising popularity of such social networking platforms coupled with limitations in verifying the veracity of shared content has contributed to increase in misinformation on these media. Misinformation content such as fake-news and hoaxes, though often considered innocuous, may have high social cost such as influencing elections decision, and thus should be investigated carefully. Many researchers have studied various aspects of fake-news including automated ways to recognize it. However, a large-scale study comparing the sharing patterns of fake-news and trusted-news is missing. In this research, we take Ukraine, a country where fake news is common, as a case study. Using datasets generated by three different Tweets collection strategies, we present an anatomical comparison of fake-news and trusted-news sharing pattern on Twitter. Such a comparison enables to identify the characteristics of tweets sharing fake-news, and allows to find the users who are more inclined to share misinformation. Besides, we also study possible bot activities in the dataset. The top conclusions derived from this study are (a) Users sharing fake-news stories are more likely to include hashtags, and the hashtags used in Tweets sharing fake-news stories are similar to hashtags used in Tweets sharing trusted news. (b) Users sharing fake-news are also more likely to include mentions, but mentions used in tweets sharing fake-news and trusted-news are often different. (c) Tweets sharing fake-news have more negative sentiment. In contrast, tweets sharing trusted-news have more positive sentiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Sumeet Kumar & Binxuan Huang & Ramon Alfonso Villa Cox & Kathleen M. Carley, 2021. "An anatomical comparison of fake-news and trusted-news sharing pattern on Twitter," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 109-133, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:comaot:v:27:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10588-019-09305-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10588-019-09305-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10588-019-09305-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10588-019-09305-5?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Victoria L. Rubin & Tatiana Lukoianova, 2015. "Truth and deception at the rhetorical structure level," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(5), pages 905-917, May.
    2. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," NBER Working Papers 23089, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Hunt Allcott & Matthew Gentzkow, 2017. "Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 31(2), pages 211-236, Spring.
    4. Jeff Alstott & Ed Bullmore & Dietmar Plenz, 2014. "powerlaw: A Python Package for Analysis of Heavy-Tailed Distributions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, January.
    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. Zhang, Chaowei & Gupta, Ashish & Kauten, Christian & Deokar, Amit V. & Qin, Xiao, 2019. "Detecting fake news for reducing misinformation risks using analytics approaches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 279(3), pages 1036-1052.
    2. Julia Cage & Nicolas Hervé & Marie-Luce Viaud, 2017. "The Production of Information in an Online World: Is Copy Right?," Working Papers hal-03393171, HAL.
    3. Leopoldo Fergusson & Carlos Molina, 2020. "Facebook Causes Protests," HiCN Working Papers 323, Households in Conflict Network.
    4. Tetsuro Kobayashi & Fumiaki Taka & Takahisa Suzuki, 2021. "Can “Googling” correct misbelief? Cognitive and affective consequences of online search," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-16, September.
    5. Dean Neu & Gregory D. Saxton & Abu S. Rahaman, 2022. "Social Accountability, Ethics, and the Occupy Wall Street Protests," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 180(1), pages 17-31, September.
    6. Robbett, Andrea & Matthews, Peter Hans, 2018. "Partisan bias and expressive voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 107-120.
    7. Henrik Skaug Sætra, 2021. "AI in Context and the Sustainable Development Goals: Factoring in the Unsustainability of the Sociotechnical System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-19, February.
    8. Fathey Mohammed & Nabil Hasan Al-Kumaim & Ahmed Ibrahim Alzahrani & Yousef Fazea, 2023. "The Impact of Social Media Shared Health Content on Protective Behavior against COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    9. Michele Cantarella & Nicolo' Fraccaroli & Roberto Volpe, 2019. "Does fake news affect voting behaviour?," Department of Economics 0146, University of Modena and Reggio E., Faculty of Economics "Marco Biagi".
    10. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2022. "(Mis-)information technology: Internet use and perception of democracy in Africa," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22010, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    11. Kerim Peren Arin & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco Lagos & Deni Mazrekaj & Marcel Thum, 2021. "Misperceptions and Fake News during the Covid-19 Pandemic," CESifo Working Paper Series 9066, CESifo.
    12. 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.
    13. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    14. Julia Cagé & Nicolas Hervé & Marie-Luce Viaud, 2020. "The Production of Information in an Online World," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 87(5), pages 2126-2164.
    15. Zazli Lily Wisker & Robert Neil McKie, 2021. "The effect of fake news on anger and negative word-of-mouth: moderating roles of religiosity and conservatism," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(2), pages 144-153, June.
    16. Roger D. Magarey & Christina M. Trexler, 2020. "Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    17. McNamara, Trent & Mosquera, Roberto, 2024. "The political divide: The case of expectations and preferences," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    18. Denter, Philipp & Ginzburg, Boris, 2021. "Troll Farms and Voter Disinformation," MPRA Paper 109634, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Christoph March & Ina Schieferdecker, 2021. "Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky," CESifo Working Paper Series 9139, CESifo.
    20. Larsen, Vegard H. & Thorsrud, Leif Anders & Zhulanova, Julia, 2021. "News-driven inflation expectations and information rigidities," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 507-520.

    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:spr:comaot:v:27:y:2021:i:2:d:10.1007_s10588-019-09305-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.