"Here's Your Evidence": False Consensus in Public Twitter Discussions of COVID-19 Science
Alexandros Efstratiou, Marina Efstratiou, Satrio Baskoro Yudhoatmojo, Jeremy Blackburn, Emiliano De Cristofaro
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic brought about an extraordinary rate of scientific papers on the topic that were discussed among the general public, although often in biased or misinformed ways. In this paper, we present a mixed-methods analysis aimed at examining whether public discussions were commensurate with the scientific consensus on several COVID-19 issues. We estimate scientific consensus based on samples of abstracts from preprint servers and compare against the volume of public discussions on Twitter mentioning these papers. We find that anti-consensus posts and users, though overall less numerous than pro-consensus ones, are vastly over-represented on Twitter, thus producing a false consensus effect. This transpires with favorable papers being disproportionately amplified, along with an influx of new anti-consensus user sign-ups. Finally, our content analysis highlights that anti-consensus users misrepresent scientific findings or question scientists' integrity in their efforts to substantiate their claims.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on14
- Measuring Misinformation in Video Search Platforms: An Audit Study on YouTubeEslam Hussein, Prerna Juneja, Tanushree MitraCSCW 2020 · 233 citations
- Viral Visualizations: How Coronavirus Skeptics Use Orthodox Data Practices to Promote Unorthodox Science OnlineCrystal Lee, Tanya Yang, Gabrielle D. Inchoco, Graham M. Jones et al.CHI 2021 · 140 citations
- Perverse Downstream Consequences of Debunking: Being Corrected by Another User for Posting False Political News Increases Subsequent Sharing of Low Quality, Partisan, and Toxic Content in a Twitter Field ExperimentMohsen Mosleh, Cameron Martel, Dean Eckles, David G. RandCHI 2021 · 109 citations
- Birds of a feather don't fact-check each other: Partisanship and the evaluation of news in Twitter's Birdwatch crowdsourced fact-checking programJennifer Allen, Cameron Martel, David G. RandCHI 2022 · 104 citations
- Will the Crowd Game the Algorithm?: Using Layperson Judgments to Combat Misinformation on Social Media by Downranking Distrusted SourcesZiv Epstein, Gordon Pennycook, David G. RandCHI 2020 · 68 citations
Related papers
- "Yeah, this graph doesn't show that": Analysis of Online Engagement with Misleading Data VisualizationsMaxim Lisnic, Alexander Lex, Marina KoganCHI 2024 · 16 citations
- Emotion Bubbles: Emotional Composition of Online Discourse Before and After the COVID-19 OutbreakAssem Zhunis, Gabriel Lima, Hyeonho Song, Jiyoung Han et al.WWW 2022 · 18 citations
- Understanding the Use of Images to Spread COVID-19 Misinformation on TwitterYuping Wang, Chen Ling, Gianluca StringhiniCSCW 2023 · 14 citations
- Misleading Beyond Visual Tricks: How People Actually Lie with ChartsMaxim Lisnic, Cole Polychronis, Alexander Lex, Marina KoganCHI 2023 · 54 citations
- Changes in European Solidarity Before and During COVID-19: Evidence from a Large Crowd- and Expert-Annotated Twitter DatasetAlexandra Ils, Dan Liu, Daniela Grunow, Steffen EgerACL 2021
