IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/x4dh7_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using Website Referrals to Identify Unreliable Content Rabbit Holes

Author

Listed:
  • Greene, Kevin T.
  • Pereira, Mayana
  • Pisharody, Nilima
  • Dodhia, Rahul
  • Ferres, Juan Lavista
  • Shapiro, Jacob N

Abstract

Does the URL referral structure of websites lead users into “rabbit holes” of unreliable content? Past work suggests algorithmic recommender systems on sites like YouTube lead users to view more unreliable content. However, websites without algorithmic recommender systems have financial and political motivations to influence the movement of users, potentially creating browsing rabbit holes. We address this gap using browser telemetry that captures referrals to a large sample of domains rated as reliable or unreliable information sources. Our results suggest the incentives for unreliable sites to retain and monetize users create rabbit holes. After landing on an unreliable site, users are very likely to be referred to another page on the site. Further, unreliable sites are better at retaining users than reliable sites. We find less support for political motivations. While reliable and unreliable sites are largely disconnected from one another, the probability of traveling from one unreliable site to another is relatively low. Our findings indicate the need for additional focus on site-level incentives to shape traffic moving through their sites.

Suggested Citation

  • Greene, Kevin T. & Pereira, Mayana & Pisharody, Nilima & Dodhia, Rahul & Ferres, Juan Lavista & Shapiro, Jacob N, 2023. "Using Website Referrals to Identify Unreliable Content Rabbit Holes," OSF Preprints x4dh7_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:x4dh7_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/x4dh7_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6487b927a31091009ad10d0a/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/x4dh7_v1?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. Gregory Eady & Jonathan Nagler & Andy Guess & Jan Zilinsky & Joshua A. Tucker, 2019. "How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media? Evidence From Linked Survey and Twitter Data," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    2. Ryan, Camille D. & Schaul, Andrew J. & Butner, Ryan & Swarthout, John T., 2020. "Monetizing disinformation in the attention economy: The case of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 7-18.
    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. Mochon, Daniel & Schwartz, Janet, 2024. "The confrontation effect: When users engage more with ideology-inconsistent content online," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    2. Guohui Song & Yongbin Wang, 2021. "Mainstream Value Information Push Strategy on Chinese Aggregation News Platform: Evolution, Modelling and Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(19), pages 1-17, October.
    3. Lisa Oswald, 2024. "More than news! Mapping the deliberative potential of a political online ecosystem with digital trace data," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Jianshan Sun & Jian Song & Yuanchun Jiang & Yezheng Liu & Jun Li, 2022. "Prick the filter bubble: A novel cross domain recommendation model with adaptive diversity regularization," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 32(1), pages 101-121, March.
    5. Pierluigi Conzo & Andrea Gallice & Juan S. Morales & Margaret Samahita & Laura K. Taylor, 2021. "Can Hearts Change Minds? Social media Endorsements and Policy Preferences," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 641, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    6. Beatriz Jordá & Azahara Cañedo & Márton Bene & Manuel Goyanes, 2021. "Out-of-Place Content: How Repetitive, Offensive, and Opinion-Challenging Social Media Posts Shape Users’ Unfriending Strategies in Spain," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, November.
    7. Simon Porcher & Thomas Renault, 2021. "Social distancing beliefs and human mobility: Evidence from Twitter," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-12, March.
    8. Daniel Muise & Nilam Ram & Thomas Robinson & Byron Reeves, 2023. "Identification, Impacts, and Opportunities of Three Common Measurement Considerations when using Digital Trace Data," Papers 2310.00197, arXiv.org.
    9. Thomas Fujiwara & Karsten Müller & Carlo Schwarz, 2024. "The Effect of Social Media on Elections: Evidence from The United States," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 22(3), pages 1495-1539.
    10. Francesco Giavazzi & Felix Iglhaut & Giacomo Lemoli & Gaia Rubera, 2020. "Terrorist Attacks, Cultural Incidents and the Vote for Radical Parties: Analyzing Text from Twitter," NBER Working Papers 26825, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Harashima, Taiji, 2023. "An Economic Theory of Disinformation," MPRA Paper 116177, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Max Falkenberg & Fabiana Zollo & Walter Quattrociocchi & Jürgen Pfeffer & Andrea Baronchelli, 2024. "Patterns of partisan toxicity and engagement reveal the common structure of online political communication across countries," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Ximeng Fang & Sven Heuser & Lasse S. Stötzer, 2023. "How In-Person Conversations Shape Political Polarization: Quasi-Experimental Evidence from a Nationwide Initiative," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 270, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    14. Ahmed Abouzeid & Ole-Christoffer Granmo & Morten Goodwin & Christian Webersik, 2024. "Towards misinformation mitigation on social media: novel user activity representation for modeling societal acceptance," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 741-776, April.
    15. Garrett M. Broad, 2023. "Improving the agri-food biotechnology conversation: bridging science communication with science and technology studies," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 40(3), pages 929-938, September.
    16. Wenting Yu & Zhicong Chen & Xiang Meng & Qing Yan, 2024. "Propagating COVID-19 Conspiracy Theories: The Influence of Right-Wing Sources," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, June.
    17. Thomas Fujiwara & Karsten Müller & Carlo Schwarz, 2021. "The Effect of Social Media on Elections: Evidence from the United States," NBER Working Papers 28849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2022. "Measuring exposure to misinformation from political elites on Twitter," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    19. Greene, Kevin T. & Pereira, Mayana & Pisharody, Nilima & Dodhia, Rahul & Ferres, Juan Lavista & Shapiro, Jacob N, 2023. "Using Website Referrals to Identify Misinformation Rabbit Holes," OSF Preprints x4dh7, Center for Open Science.
    20. Lyytimäki, Jari & Assmuth, Timo & Paloniemi, Riikka & Pyysiäinen, Jarkko & Rantala, Salla & Rikkonen, Pasi & Tapio, Petri & Vainio, Annukka & Winquist, Erika, 2021. "Two sides of biogas: Review of ten dichotomous argumentation lines of sustainable energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:osf:osfxxx:x4dh7_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.