BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Manoel Horta Ribeiro

Manoel Horta Ribeiro contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Social and Information Networkscs.CYeess.SPMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
7works
0followers
4topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

7 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

When "Likers'' Go Private: Engagement With Reputationally Risky Content on X

In June 2024, X/Twitter changed likes' visibility from public to private, offering a rare, platform-level opportunity to study how the visibility of engagement signals affects users' behavior. Here, we investigate whether hiding liker identities increases the number of likes received by high-reputational-risk content, content for which public endorsement may carry high social or reputational costs due to its topic (e.g., politics) or the account context in which it appears (e.g., partisan accounts). To this end, we conduct two complementary studies: 1) a Difference-in-Differences analysis of engagement with 154,122 posts by 1068 accounts before and after the policy change. 2) a within-subject survey experiment with 203 X users on participants' self-reported willingness to like different kinds of content. We find no detectable platform-level increase in likes for high-reputational-risk content (Study 1). This finding is robust for both between-group comparison of high- versus low-reputational-risk accounts and within-group comparison across engagement types (i.e., likes vs. reposts). Additionally, while participants in the survey experiment report modest increases in willingness to like high-reputational-risk content under private versus public visibility, these increases do not lead to significant changes in the group-level average likelihood of liking posts (Study 2). Taken together, our results suggest that hiding likes produces a limited behavioral response at the platform level. This may be caused by a gap between user intention and behavior, or by engagement driven by a narrow set of high-usage or automated accounts.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2024arXiv

Deplatforming Norm-Violating Influencers on Social Media Reduces Overall Online Attention Toward Them

From politicians to podcast hosts, online platforms have systematically banned (``deplatformed'') influential users for breaking platform guidelines. Previous inquiries on the effectiveness of this intervention are inconclusive because 1) they consider only few deplatforming events; 2) they consider only overt engagement traces (e.g., likes and posts) but not passive engagement (e.g., views); 3) they do not consider all the potential places users impacted by the deplatforming event might migrate to. We address these limitations in a longitudinal, quasi-experimental study of 165 deplatforming events targeted at 101 influencers. We collect deplatforming events from Reddit posts and then manually curate the data, ensuring the correctness of a large dataset of deplatforming events. Then, we link these events to Google Trends and Wikipedia page views, platform-agnostic measures of online attention that capture the general public's interest in specific influencers. Through a difference-in-differences approach, we find that deplatforming reduces online attention toward influencers. After 12 months, we estimate that online attention toward deplatformed influencers is reduced by -63% (95% CI [-75%,-46%]) on Google and by -43% (95% CI [-57%,-24%]) on Wikipedia. Further, as we study over a hundred deplatforming events, we can analyze in which cases deplatforming is more or less impactful, revealing nuances about the intervention. Notably, we find that both permanent and temporary deplatforming reduce online attention toward influencers; Overall, this work contributes to the ongoing effort to map the effectiveness of content moderation interventions, driving platform governance away from speculation.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Analyzing the "Sleeping Giants" Activism Model in Brazil

In 2020, amidst the COVID pandemic and a polarized political climate, the Sleeping Giants online activist movement gained traction in Brazil. Its rationale was simple: to curb the spread of misinformation by harming the advertising revenue of sources that produce this type of content. Like its international counterparts, Sleeping Giants Brasil (SGB) campaigned against media outlets using Twitter to ask companies to remove ads from the targeted outlets. This work presents a thorough quantitative characterization of this activism model, analyzing the three campaigns carried out by SGB between May and September 2020. To do so, we use digital traces from both Twitter and Google Trends, toxicity and sentiment classifiers trained for the Portuguese language, and an annotated corpus of SGB's tweets. Our key findings were threefold. First, we found that SGB's requests to companies were largely successful (with 83.85\% of all 192 targeted companies responding positively) and that user pressure was correlated to the speed of companies' responses. Second, there were no significant changes in the online attention and the user engagement going towards the targeted media outlets in the six months that followed SGB's campaign (as measured by Google Trends and Twitter engagement). Third, we observed that user interactions with companies changed only transiently, even if the companies did not respond to SGB's request. Overall, our results paint a nuanced portrait of internet activism. On the one hand, they suggest that SGB was successful in getting companies to boycott specific media outlets, which may have harmed their advertisement revenue stream. On the other hand, they also suggest that the activist movement did not impact the online attention these media outlets received nor the online image of companies that did not respond positively to their requests.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Can online attention signals help fact-checkers fact-check?

Recent research suggests that not all fact-checking efforts are equal: when and what is fact-checked plays a pivotal role in effectively correcting misconceptions. In that context, signals capturing how much attention specific topics receive on the Internet have the potential to study (and possibly support) fact-checking efforts. This paper proposes a framework to study fact-checking with online attention signals. The framework consists of: 1) extracting claims from fact-checking efforts; 2) linking such claims with knowledge graph entities; and 3) estimating the online attention these entities receive. We use this framework to conduct a preliminary study of a dataset of 879 COVID-19-related fact-checks done in 2020 by 81 international organizations. Our findings suggest that there is often a disconnect between online attention and fact-checking efforts. For example, in around 40% of countries that fact-checked ten or more claims, half or more than half of the ten most popular claims were not fact-checked. Our analysis also shows that claims are first fact-checked after receiving, on average, 35% of the total online attention they would eventually receive in 2020. Yet, there is a considerable variation among claims: some were fact-checked before receiving a surge of misinformation-induced online attention; others are fact-checked much later. Overall, our work suggests that the incorporation of online attention signals may help organizations assess their fact-checking efforts and choose what and when to fact-check claims or stories. Also, in the context of international collaboration, where claims are fact-checked multiple times across different countries, online attention could help organizations keep track of which claims are "migrating" between countries.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Post Approvals in Online Communities

In many online communities, community leaders (i.e., moderators and administrators) can proactively filter undesired content by requiring posts to be approved before publication. But although many communities adopt post approvals, there has been little research on its impact on community behavior. Through a longitudinal analysis of 233,402 Facebook Groups, we examined 1) the factors that led to a community adopting post approvals and 2) how the setting shaped subsequent user activity and moderation in the group. We find that communities that adopted post approvals tended to do so following sudden increases in user activity (e.g., comments) and moderation (e.g., reported posts). This adoption of post approvals led to fewer but higher-quality posts. Though fewer posts were shared after adoption, not only did community members write more comments, use more reactions, and spend more time on the posts that were shared, they also reported these posts less. Further, post approvals did not significantly increase the average time leaders spent in the group, though groups that enabled the setting tended to appoint more leaders. Last, the impact of post approvals varied with both group size and how the setting was used, e.g.,, group size mediates whether leaders spent more or less time in the group following the adoption of the setting. Our findings suggest ways that proactive content moderation may be improved to better support online communities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Automatic diagnosis of the 12-lead ECG using a deep neural network

The role of automatic electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis in clinical practice is limited by the accuracy of existing models. Deep Neural Networks (DNNs) are models composed of stacked transformations that learn tasks by examples. This technology has recently achieved striking success in a variety of task and there are great expectations on how it might improve clinical practice. Here we present a DNN model trained in a dataset with more than 2 million labeled exams analyzed by the Telehealth Network of Minas Gerais and collected under the scope of the CODE (Clinical Outcomes in Digital Electrocardiology) study. The DNN outperform cardiology resident medical doctors in recognizing 6 types of abnormalities in 12-lead ECG recordings, with F1 scores above 80% and specificity over 99%. These results indicate ECG analysis based on DNNs, previously studied in a single-lead setup, generalizes well to 12-lead exams, taking the technology closer to the standard clinical practice.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Experts and authorities receive disproportionate attention on Twitter during the COVID-19 crisis

Timely access to accurate information is crucial during the COVID-19 pandemic. Prompted by key stakeholders' cautioning against an "infodemic", we study information sharing on Twitter from January through May 2020. We observe an overall surge in the volume of general as well as COVID-19-related tweets around peak lockdown in March/April 2020. With respect to engagement (retweets and likes), accounts related to healthcare, science, government and politics received by far the largest boosts, whereas accounts related to religion and sports saw a relative decrease in engagement. While the threat of an "infodemic" remains, our results show that social media also provide a platform for experts and public authorities to be widely heard during a global crisis.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access