ArticlePloS one2021
Networked partisanship and framing: A socio-semantic network analysis of the Italian debate on migration.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Leveraging content producer networks and user perception to detect online discursive communities.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Entropy-based detection of Twitter echo chambers.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Bow-tie structures of twitter discursive communities.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Measuring user engagement with low credibility media sources in a controversial online debate.EPJ data science · 2022Article
- Maximum entropy networks for large scale social network node analysis.Applied network science · 2022Article
- Brexit and bots: characterizing the behaviour of automated accounts on Twitter during the UK election.EPJ data science · 2022Article
- Analysing Twitter semantic networks: the case of 2018 Italian elections.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Italian Twitter semantic network during the Covid-19 epidemic.EPJ data science · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The huge amount of data made available by the massive usage of social media has opened up the unprecedented possibility to carry out a data-driven study of political processes. While particular attention has been paid to phenomena like elite and mass polarization during online debates and echo-chambers formation, the interplay between online partisanship and framing practices, jointly sustaining adversarial dynamics, still remains overlooked. With the present paper, we carry out a socio-semantic analysis of the debate about migration policies observed on the Italian Twittersphere, across the period May-November 2019. As regards the social analysis, our methodology allows us to extract relevant information about the political orientation of the communities of users-hereby called partisan communities-without resorting upon any external information. Remarkably, our community detection technique is sensitive enough to clearly highlight the dynamics characterizing the relationship among different political forces. As regards the semantic analysis, our networks of hashtags display a mesoscale structure organized in a core-periphery fashion, across the entire observation period. Taken altogether, our results point at different, yet overlapping, trajectories of conflict played out using migration issues as a backdrop. A first line opposes communities discussing substantively of migration to communities approaching this issue just to fuel hostility against political opponents; within the second line, a mechanism of distancing between partisan communities reflects shifting political alliances within the governmental coalition. Ultimately, our results contribute to shed light on the complexity of the Italian political context characterized by multiple poles of partisan alignment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.