ArticleScientific reports2024
Patterns of human and bots behaviour on Twitter conversations about sustainability.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sustainability is an issue of worldwide concern. Twitter is one of the most popular social networks, which makes it particularly interesting for exploring opinions and characteristics related to issues of social preoccupation. This paper aims to gain a better understanding of the activity related to sustainability that takes place on twitter. In addition to building a mathematical model to identify account typologies (bot and human users), different behavioural patterns were detected using clustering analysis mainly in the mechanisms of posting tweets and retweets). The model took as explanatory variables, certain characteristics of the user's profile and her/his activity. A lexicon-based sentiment analysis in the period from 2006 to 2022 was also carried out in conjunction with a keyword study based on centrality metrics. We found that, in both bot and human users, messages showed mostly a positive sentiment. Bots had a higher percentage of neutral messages than human users. With respect to the used keywords certain commonalities but also slight differences between humans and bots were identified.
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.