Paper detail

Do you trust experts on Twitter?: Successful correction of COVID-19-related misinformation

This study focuses on how scientifically-correct information is disseminated through social media, and how misinformation can be corrected. We have identified examples on Twitter where scientific terms that have been misused have been rectified and replaced by scientifically-correct terms through the interaction of users. The results show that the percentage of correct terms ("variant" or "COVID-19 variant") being used instead of the incorrect terms ("strain") on Twitter has already increased since the end of December 2020. This was about a month before the release of an official statement by the Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases regarding the correct terminology, and the use of terms on social media was faster than it was in television. Some Twitter users who quickly started using the correct term were more likely to retweet messages sent by leading influencers on Twitter, rather than messages sent by traditional media or portal sites. However, a few Twitter users continued to use wrong terms even after March 2021, even though the use of the correct terms was widespread. Further analysis of their tweets revealed that they were quoting sources that differed from that of other users. This study empirically verified that self-correction occurs even on Twitter, which is often known as a "hotbed for spreading rumors." The results of this study also suggest that influencers with expertise can influence the direction of public opinion on social media and that the media that users usually cite can also affect the possibility of behavioral changes.

preprint2021arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.