BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research pathsDiscover
Research tools
Network
Opportunities
Account
Source author record
Peter Tolmie appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.
Catalog footprint
Research graph
Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
In this paper we consider some empirical materials from our ongoing research into forms of everyday detection and diagnosis work in healthcare settings, and how these relate to issues of trust; trust in people, in technology, processes and in data.
As breaking news unfolds people increasingly rely on social media to stay abreast of the latest updates. The use of social media in such situations comes with the caveat that new information being released piecemeal may encourage rumours, many of which remain unverified long after their point of release. Little is known, however, about the dynamics of the life cycle of a social media rumour. In this paper we present a methodology that has enabled us to collect, identify and annotate a dataset of 330 rumour threads (4,842 tweets) associated with 9 newsworthy events. We analyse this dataset to understand how users spread, support, or deny rumours that are later proven true or false, by distinguishing two levels of status in a rumour life cycle i.e., before and after its veracity status is resolved. The identification of rumours associated with each event, as well as the tweet that resolved each rumour as true or false, was performed by a team of journalists who tracked the events in real time. Our study shows that rumours that are ultimately proven true tend to be resolved faster than those that turn out to be false. Whilst one can readily see users denying rumours once they have been debunked, users appear to be less capable of distinguishing true from false rumours when their veracity remains in question. In fact, we show that the prevalent tendency for users is to support every unverified rumour. We also analyse the role of different types of users, finding that highly reputable users such as news organisations endeavour to post well-grounded statements, which appear to be certain and accompanied by evidence. Nevertheless, these often prove to be unverified pieces of information that give rise to false rumours. Our study reinforces the need for developing robust machine learning techniques that can provide assistance for assessing the veracity of rumours.
The spread of false rumours during emergencies can jeopardise the well-being of citizens as they are monitoring the stream of news from social media to stay abreast of the latest updates. In this paper, we describe the methodology we have developed within the PHEME project for the collection and sampling of conversational threads, as well as the tool we have developed to facilitate the annotation of these threads so as to identify rumourous ones. We describe the annotation task conducted on threads collected during the 2014 Ferguson unrest and we present and analyse our findings. Our results show that we can collect effectively social media rumours and identify multiple rumours associated with a range of stories that would have been hard to identify by relying on existing techniques that need manual input of rumour-specific keywords.