Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34977334›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of data science and analytics2022

Conspiracy theories on Twitter: emerging motifs and temporal dynamics during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Veronika Batzdorfer, Holger Steinmetz, Marco Biella, Meysam Alizadeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of data science and analytics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. AI and data science for smart emergency, crisis and disaster resilience.International journal of data science and analytics · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Online information disorder: fake news, bots and trolls.International journal of data science and analytics · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Veronika BatzdorferComputational Social Science, GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Cologne, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2678-2579
Holger SteinmetzFaculty of Management, University of Trier, Trier, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5052-4214
Marco BiellaDepartment of Psychology, Eberhard Karls Universität Tuebingen, Tuebingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8039-0170
Meysam AlizadehKennedy School of Government, Harvard University, Cambridge, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in an upsurge in the spread of diverse conspiracy theories (CTs) with real-life impact. However, the dynamics of user engagement remain under-researched. In the present study, we leverage Twitter data across 11 months in 2020 from the timelines of 109 CT posters and a comparison group (non-CT group) of equal size. Within this approach, we used word embeddings to distinguish non-CT content from CT-related content as well as analysed which element of CT content emerged in the pandemic. Subsequently, we applied time series analyses on the aggregate and individual level to investigate whether there is a difference between CT posters and non-CT posters in non-CT tweets as well as the temporal dynamics of CT tweets. In this regard, we provide a description of the aggregate and individual series, conducted a STL decomposition in trends, seasons, and errors, as well as an autocorrelation analysis, and applied generalised additive mixed models to analyse nonlinear trends and their differences across users. The narrative motifs, characterised by word embeddings, address pandemic-specific motifs alongside broader motifs and can be related to several psychological needs (epistemic, existential, or social). Overall, the comparison of the CT group and non-CT group showed a substantially higher level of overall COVID-19-related tweets in the non-CT group and higher level of random fluctuations. Focussing on conspiracy tweets, we found a slight positive trend but, more importantly, an increase in users in 2020. Moreover, the aggregate series of CT content revealed two breaks in 2020 and a significant albeit weak positive trend since June. On the individual level, the series showed strong differences in temporal dynamics and a high degree of randomness and day-specific sensitivity. The results stress the importance of Twitter as a means of communication during the pandemic and illustrate that these beliefs travel very fast and are quickly endorsed. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41060-021-00298-6.

Indexed as

Conspiracy beliefsCOVID-19Time series analysisTwitter structural break analysisWord embedding

Identifiers

PMID34977334
PMCPMC8703214

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.