ArticlePloS one2025
Identifying and characterizing ideologically homogeneous clusters on Twitter and Parler during the 2020 election.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the 2020 U.S. presidential election cycle, a combination of public statements and social media posts cast doubt on the legitimacy of the election. These sentiments flowed through various social networks and eventually sparked the January 6th insurrection at the Capitol. Here, we analyze both the network-level and content-level data that made the #StopTheSteal movement so effective online. We use Louvain clustering and a novel homogeneity metric to identify the most ideologically homogeneous groups within the discussion on the mainstream social network Twitter and alternative social network Parler. We show that these ideologically homogeneous groups spread messages further than their ideologically diverse counterparts. Our results also differentiate between ideologically homogeneous left- and right-leaning groups by measuring the characteristics of their texts, finding that right-leaning texts are stylistically similar to worldbuilding language that can be found in conspiracy theory texts.
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.