False news around COVID-19 circulated less on Sina Weibo than on Twitter. How to overcome false information?

IF 1.1 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences-RIMCIS Pub Date : 2020-04-13 DOI:10.17583/rimcis.2020.5386
Cristina Pulido Rodríguez, Beatriz Villarejo Carballido, Gisela Redondo-Sama, Mengna Guo, M. Ramis, R. Flecha
{"title":"False news around COVID-19 circulated less on Sina Weibo than on Twitter. How to overcome false information?","authors":"Cristina Pulido Rodríguez, Beatriz Villarejo Carballido, Gisela Redondo-Sama, Mengna Guo, M. Ramis, R. Flecha","doi":"10.17583/rimcis.2020.5386","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Since the Coronavirus health emergency was declared, many are the fake news that have circulated around this topic, including rumours, conspiracy theories and myths. According to the World Economic Forum, fake news is one of the threats in today's societies, since this type of information circulates fast and is often inaccurate and misleading. Moreover, fake-news are far more shared than evidence-based news among social media users and thus, this can potentially lead to decisions that do not consider the individual’s best interest. Drawing from this evidence, the present study aims at comparing the type of Tweets and Sina Weibo posts regarding COVID-19 that contain either false or scientific veracious information. To that end 1923 messages from each social media were retrieved, classified and compared. Results show that there is more false news published and shared on Twitter than in Sina Weibo, at the same time science-based evidence is more shared on Twitter than in Weibo but less than false news. This stresses the need to find effective practices to limit the circulation of false information.","PeriodicalId":43006,"journal":{"name":"International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences-RIMCIS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"67","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International and Multidisciplinary Journal of Social Sciences-RIMCIS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17583/rimcis.2020.5386","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 67

Abstract

Since the Coronavirus health emergency was declared, many are the fake news that have circulated around this topic, including rumours, conspiracy theories and myths. According to the World Economic Forum, fake news is one of the threats in today's societies, since this type of information circulates fast and is often inaccurate and misleading. Moreover, fake-news are far more shared than evidence-based news among social media users and thus, this can potentially lead to decisions that do not consider the individual’s best interest. Drawing from this evidence, the present study aims at comparing the type of Tweets and Sina Weibo posts regarding COVID-19 that contain either false or scientific veracious information. To that end 1923 messages from each social media were retrieved, classified and compared. Results show that there is more false news published and shared on Twitter than in Sina Weibo, at the same time science-based evidence is more shared on Twitter than in Weibo but less than false news. This stresses the need to find effective practices to limit the circulation of false information.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新浪微博上关于新冠肺炎的假新闻比推特上传播的要少。如何克服虚假信息?
自冠状病毒卫生紧急状态宣布以来,围绕这一话题流传的许多假新闻,包括谣言、阴谋论和神话。据世界经济论坛称,假新闻是当今社会的威胁之一,因为这类信息传播迅速,往往是不准确和误导的。此外,在社交媒体用户中,假新闻比基于证据的新闻分享得更多,因此,这可能会导致不考虑个人最佳利益的决定。根据这一证据,本研究旨在比较关于COVID-19的推文和新浪微博帖子的类型,这些帖子包含虚假信息或科学真实信息。为此,从每个社交媒体检索、分类和比较了1923条信息。结果表明,Twitter上发布和分享的虚假新闻多于新浪微博,同时Twitter上科学证据的分享多于微博,但少于虚假新闻。这强调需要找到有效的做法来限制虚假信息的传播。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
9
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
The Harmonization Between Humans and Animals Particularly the Balinese Dog Race in Bali Ethics And Social Procedures In Lontara Pappaseng As A Guideline And Philosophy Of Life Of Buginese Society In South Sulawesi Hindu Religious Ethics Values and Tolerance In Darmakaya's Gaguritan An Analysis of Differences in Online and Offline Learning at Mahardika Elementary School of Denpasar Humanist, Pluralist, and Dialogical Concepts in Hindu Theology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1