ArticlePloS one2024
Understanding anti-immigration sentiment spreading on Twitter.
Article in PloS one, 2024. 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.
- Mindful minds: How group identity shapes brain and behavior in social decision-making.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
- Large language models identify immigration attitudes in online discourse regardless of language.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Migrant and Non-migrant Views on Immigration in Europe.European journal of population = Revue europeenne de demographie · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Immigration is one of the most salient topics in public debate. Social media heavily influences opinions on immigration, often sparking polarized debates and offline tensions. Studying 220,870 immigration-related tweets in the UK, we assessed the extent of polarization, key content creators and disseminators, and the speed of content dissemination. We identify a high degree of online polarization between pro and anti-immigration communities. We found that the anti-migration community is small but denser and more active than the pro-immigration community with the top 1% of users responsible for over 23% of anti-immigration tweets and 21% of retweets. We also discovered that anti-immigration content spreads also 1.66 times faster than pro-immigration messages and bots have minimal impact on content dissemination. Our findings suggest that identifying and tracking highly active users could curb anti-immigration sentiment, potentially easing social polarization and shaping broader societal attitudes toward migration.
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.