ArticleScientific reports2023
Opinion manipulation on Farsi Twitter.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward an integrated and globally equitable understanding of political polarization.Nature communications · 2026Review
- Article
- Modelling and predicting online vaccination views using bow-tie decomposition.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- A structural approach to detecting opinion leaders in Twitter by random matrix theory.Scientific reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For Iranians and the Iranian diaspora, the Farsi Twittersphere provides an important alternative to state media and an outlet for political discourse. But this understudied online space has become an opinion manipulation battleground, with diverse actors using inauthentic accounts to advance their goals and shape online narratives. Examining trending discussions crossing social cleavages in Iran, we explore how the dynamics of opinion manipulation differ across diverse issue areas. Our analysis suggests that opinion manipulation by inauthentic accounts is more prevalent in divisive political discussions than non-divisive or apolitical discussions. We show how Twitter's network structures help to reinforce the content propagated by clusters of inauthentic accounts in divisive political discussions. Analyzing both the content and structure of online discussions in the Iranian Twittersphere, this work contributes to a growing body of literature exploring the dynamics of online opinion manipulation, while improving our understanding of how information is controlled in the digital age.
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.