ArticleSocial science & medicine (1982)2023
From pandemic to Plandemic: Examining the amplification and attenuation of COVID-19 misinformation on social media.
Article in Social science & medicine (1982), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Influence of Social Media Use on Waste Sorting Intentions: A Cognition-Affect-Conation Model Integration with Social Amplification of Risk Framework.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Understanding crisis dynamics during public health emergencies: an integrated framework of social consequences, trust, and behavioral responses.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Public information sharing during public health emergencies: an adaptive-network evolutionary game.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Anti-science and the science community.Nature reviews. Microbiology · 2025Article
- Science tikkun: a bioscience pandemic framework in a Hebrew tradition of global repair.Molecular medicine (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Use of Retrieval-Augmented Large Language Model for COVID-19 Fact-Checking: Development and Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- From perceived threat to coping strategies: exploring the role of social media and its impact on loneliness and anxiety during the COVID-19 quarantine.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Association between beliefs in medical conspiracy theories and health behaviors among medical and healthcare students. Implications for professional practice.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Examining media's coverage of COVID-19 vaccines and social media sentiments on vaccine manufacturers' stock prices.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
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
This study examines the proliferation of COVID-19 misinformation through Plandemic-a pseudo-documentary of COVID-19 conspiracy theories-on social media and examines how factors such as (a) themes of misinformation, (b) types of misinformation, (c) sources of misinformation, (d) emotions of misinformation, and (e) fact-checking labels amplify or attenuate online misinformation during the early days of the pandemic. Using CrowdTangle, a Facebook API, we collected a total of 5732 publicly available Facebook pages posts containing Plandemic-related keywords from January 1 to December 19, 2020. A random sample of 600 posts was subsequently coded, and the data were analyzed using negative binomial regression to examine factors associated with amplification and attenuation. Overall, the extended an extended Social Amplification of Risk Framework (SARF) provided a theoretical lens to understand why certain misinformation was amplified, while others were attenuated. As for posts with misinformation, results showed that themes related to private firms, treatment and prevention of virus transmission, diagnosis and health impacts, virus origins, and social impact were more likely to be amplified. While the different types of misinformation (manipulated, fabricated, or satire) and emotions were not associated with amplification, the type of fact-check labels did influence the virality of misinformation. Specifically, posts that were flagged as false by Facebook were more likely to be amplified, while the virality of posts flagged as containing partially false information was attenuated. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.
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.