ArticleThe British journal of social psychology2025
Not our kind of crowd! How partisan bias distorts perceptions of political bots on Twitter (now X).
Article in The British journal of social psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Not our kind of crowd! How partisan bias distorts perceptions of political bots on Twitter (now X).The British journal of social psychology · 2025Article
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
Abstract
Social bots, employed to manipulate public opinion, pose a novel threat to digital societies. Existing bot research has emphasized technological aspects while neglecting psychological factors shaping human-bot interactions. This research addresses this gap within the context of the US-American electorate. Two datasets provide evidence that partisanship distorts (a) online users' representation of bots, (b) their ability to identify them, and (c) their intentions to interact with them. Study 1 explores global bot perceptions on through survey data from N = 452 Twitter (now X) users. Results suggest that users tend to attribute bot-related dangers to political adversaries, rather than recognizing bots as a shared threat to political discourse. Study 2 (N = 619) evaluates the consequences of such misrepresentations for the quality of online interactions. In an online experiment, participants were asked to differentiate between human and bot profiles. Results indicate that partisan leanings explained systematic judgement errors. The same data suggest that participants aim to avoid interacting with bots. However, biased judgements may undermine this motivation in praxis. In sum, the presented findings underscore the importance of interdisciplinary strategies that consider technological and human factors to address the threats posed by bots in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
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.