Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

COVID-19’s (Mis)Information Ecosystem on Twitter: How Partisanship Boosts the Spread of Conspiracy Narratives on German Speaking Twitter

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Information and Communication (FICC 2021)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 1363))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In late 2019, the gravest pandemic in a century began spreading across the world. A state of uncertainty related to what has become known as SARS-CoV-2 has since fueled conspiracy narratives on social media about the origin, transmission and medical treatment of and vaccination against the resulting disease, COVID-19. Using social media intelligence to monitor and understand the proliferation of conspiracy narratives is one way to analyze the distribution of misinformation on the pandemic. We analyzed more than 9.5M German language tweets about COVID-19. The results show that only about 0.6% of all those tweets deal with conspiracy theory narratives. We also found that the political orientation of users correlates with the volume of content users contribute to the dissemination of conspiracy narratives, implying that partisan communicators have a higher motivation to take part in conspiratorial discussions on Twitter. Finally, we showed that contrary to other studies, automated accounts do not significantly influence the spread of misinformation in the German speaking Twitter sphere. They only represent about 1.31% of all conspiracy-related activities in our database.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    We used “homöopath” in order to match both German words “homöopathie” and “homöopathisch”.

References

  1. Abalakina-Paap, M., Stephan, W.G., Craig, T., Larry Gregory, W.: Beliefs in conspiracies. Polit. Psychol. 20(3), 637–647 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Agresti, A.: Categorical Data Analysis, vol. 482. Wiley, Hoboken (2003)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Ahmed, W., Vidal-Alaball, J., Downing, J., Seguí, F.L.: Covid-19 and the 5g conspiracy theory: social network analysis of Twitter data. J. Med. Internet Res.D 22(5), e19458 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Alothali, E., Zaki, N., Mohamed, E.A., Alashwal, H.: Detecting social bots on Twitter: a literature review. In: 2018 International Conference on Innovations in Information Technology (IIT), pp. 175–180. IEEE (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Boberg, S., Quandt, T., Schatto-Eckrodt, T., Frischlich, L.: Pandemic populism: Facebook pages of alternative news media and the corona crisis–a computational content analysis (2020). arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.02566

  6. Bogart, L.M., Wagner, G., Galvan, F.H., Banks, D.: Conspiracy beliefs about HIV are related to antiretroviral treatment nonadherence among African American men with HIV. J. Acquir. Immune Defic. Syndr. 53(5), 648 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Boyd, D., Golder, S., Lotan, G.: Tweet, tweet, retweet: conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter. In: 2010 43rd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pp. 1–10. IEEE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Davis, C.A., Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: BotOrNot: a system to evaluate social bots. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web, pp. 273–274 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Depoux, A., Martin, S., Karafillakis, E., Preet, R., Wilder-Smith, A., Larson, H.: The pandemic of social media panic travels faster than the COVID-19 outbreak. J. Travel Med. 27(3), taaa031 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Enders, A.M., Smallpage, S.M., Lupton, R.N.: Are all ‘birthers’ conspiracy theorists? On the relationship between conspiratorial thinking and political orientations. Br. J. Polit. Sci. 50(3), 849–866 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ferrara, E.: What types of COVID-19 conspiracies are populated by Twitter bots? First Monday, May 2020

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ferrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F., Flammini, A.: The rise of social bots. Commun. ACM 59(7), 96–104 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Fletcher, R., Cornia, A., Nielsen, R.K.: How polarized are online and offline news audiences? A comparative analysis of twelve countries. Int. J. Press/Polit. 25(2), 169–195 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Frank, A., Hörmann, S., Krombach, J., Fatke, B., Holzhüter, F., Frank, W., Sondergeld, R., Förstl, H., Hölzle, P.: Covid-19 concerns and worries in patients with mental illness. Psychiatr. Prax. 47(5), 267–272 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Garimella, K., De Francisc iMorales, G., Gionis, A., Mathioudakis, M.: Mary, mary, quite contrary: exposing Twitter users to contrarian news. In: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion, pp. 201–205 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Geissler, E., Sprinkle, H.S., Erhard Geissler and Robert Hunt Sprinkle: Disinformation squared: was the HIV-from-Fort-Detrick myth a Stasi success? Polit. Life Sci. 32(2), 2–99 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Grimes, D.R.: On the viability of conspiratorial beliefs. PLOS ONE 11(1), 1–17 (2016)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Guo, Y.-R., Cao, Q.-D., Hong, Z.-S., Tan, Y.-Y., Chen, S.-D., Jin, H.-J., Tan, K.-S., Wang, D.-Y., Yan, Y.: The origin, transmission and clinical therapies on coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) outbreak-an update on the status. Mil. Med. Res. 7(1), 1–10 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ho, C.S., Chee, C.Y., Ho, R.C.: Mental health strategies to combat the psychological impact of covid-19 beyond paranoia and panic. Ann. Acad. Med. Singapore 49(1), 1–3 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Netzpolitik Homepage, 13 May 2020. https://netzpolitik.org/2020/wenn-die-eltern-ploetzlich-an-verschwoerungstheorien-glauben-corona pandemie/. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  21. Twitter, 22 March 2020. https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1253044734416711680. Accessed 2 Sept 2020

  22. BBC Homepage, 11 March 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/world 51839944. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  23. Bloomberg Homepage, 17 March 2020. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-03-17/facebook-microsoft-google-team-up-against-virus misinformation. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  24. Pew Research Center, 18 March 2020. https://www.journalism.org/2020/03/18/americans-immersed-in-covid-19-news-most-think-media-are-doing-fairly-well-covering it/. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  25. Pew Research Center, 10 April 2019. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-mostly-unchanged-since2018/. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  26. Tagesschau Homepage, 24 March 2020. https://www.tagesschau.de/faktenfinder/corona-ibuprofen101.html. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  27. WHO Homepage, 01 June 2020. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200601-covid-19-sitrep133.pdf. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  28. WHO Homepage, 25 August 2020. https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/immunizing-the-public-againstmisinformation. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  29. WHO Homepage, 12 March 2020. https://www.who.int/who-documents-detail/a-coordinated-global-researchroadmap. Accessed 02 Sept 2020

  30. Imhoff, R., Bruder, M.: Speaking (un-)truth to power: conspiracy mentality as a generalised political attitude. Eur. J. Pers. 28(1), 25–43 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Imhoff, R., Lamberty, P.: A bioweapon or a hoax? The link between distinct conspiracy beliefs about the coronavirus disease (covid-19) outbreak and pandemic behavior. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 11(8), 1110–1118 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. De Keersmaecker, J., Roets, A.: ‘Fake news’: incorrect, but hard to correct. The role of cognitive ability on the impact of false information on social impressions. Intelligence 65, 107–110 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Klofstad, C.A., Uscinski, J.E., Connolly, J.M., West, J.P.: What drives people to believe in zika conspiracy theories? Palgrave Commun. 5(1), 1–8 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kruglanski, A.W., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., De Grada, E.: Groups as epistemic providers: need for closure and the unfolding of group-centrism. Psychol. Rev. 113(1), 84 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mancosu, M., Vassallo, S., Vezzoni, C.: Believing in conspiracy theories: evidence from an exploratory analysis of Italian survey data. South Eur. Soc. Polit. 22(3), 327–344 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Newheiser, A.-K., Farias, M., Tausch, N.: The functional nature of conspiracy beliefs: examining the underpinnings of belief in the Da Vinci Code conspiracy. Pers. Individ. Differ. 51(8), 1007–1011 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. OECD: OECD Economic Outlook, Interim Report March 2020 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Popper, K.: The Open Society and its Enemies: Hegel and Marx. Routledge (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rajkumar, R.P.: Covid-19 and mental health: a review of the existing literature. Asian J. Psychiatry 52, 102066 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Serrano, J.C.M., Papakyriakopoulos, O., Hegelich, S.: NLP-based feature extraction for the detection of covid-19 misinformation videos on outube (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Shahsavari, S., Holur, P., Tangherlini, T.R., Roychowdhury, V.: Conspiracy in the time of corona: automatic detection of covid-19 conspiracy theories in social media and the news. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.13783 (2020)

  42. Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G.L., Varol, O., Flammini, A., Menczer, F.: The spread of fake news by social bots. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.07592 (2017). vol. 96, p. 104

  43. Swami, V., Coles, R., Stieger, S., Pietschnig, J., Furnham, A., Rehim, S., Voracek, M.: Conspiracist ideation in Britain and Austria: evidence of a monological belief system and associations between individual psychological differences and real-world and fictitious conspiracy theories. Br. J. Psychol. 102(3), 443–463 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tangherlini, T.R., Shahsavari, S., Shahbazi, B., Ebrahimzadeh, E., Roychowdhury, V.: An automated pipeline for the discovery of conspiracy and conspiracy theory narrative frameworks: bridgegate, pizzagate and storytelling on the web. PLOS ONE 15(6), 1–39 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. van Prooijen, J.-W.: Why education predicts decreased belief in conspiracy theories. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 31(1), 50–58 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. van Prooijen, J.-W., Krouwel, A.P.M., Pollet, T.V.: Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Soci. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 6(5), 570–578 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Davis, C.A., Menczer, F., Flammini, A.: Online human-bot interactions: detection, estimation, and characterization. In: 11th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  48. Whitson, J.A., Galinsky, A.D.: Lacking control increases illusory pattern perception. Science 322(5898), 115–117 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wood, M.J., Douglas, K.M., Sutton, R.M.: Dead and alive: beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 3(6), 767–773 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Xie, P., Ma, W., Tang, H., Liu, D.: Severe covid-19: a review of recent progress with a look toward the future. Front. Pub. Health 8, 189 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Yang, J., Rojas, H., Wojcieszak, M., Aalberg, T., Coen, S., Curran, J., Hayashi, K., Iyengar, S., Jones, P.K., Mazzoleni, G., Papathanassopoulos, S., Rhee, J.W., Rowe, D., Soroka, S., Tiffen, R.: Why are “others” so polarized? Perceived political polarization and media use in 10 countries. J. Comput. Mediated Commun. 21(5), 349–367 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Media and Communications Management, University of St. Gallen, Blumenbergpl. 9, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Morteza Shahrezaye, Miriam Meckel, Léa Steinacker & Viktor Suter

Authors
  1. Morteza Shahrezaye
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Miriam Meckel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Léa Steinacker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Viktor Suter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Morteza Shahrezaye .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Science and Engineering, Saga University, Saga, Japan

    Kohei Arai

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Shahrezaye, M., Meckel, M., Steinacker, L., Suter, V. (2021). COVID-19’s (Mis)Information Ecosystem on Twitter: How Partisanship Boosts the Spread of Conspiracy Narratives on German Speaking Twitter. In: Arai, K. (eds) Advances in Information and Communication. FICC 2021. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1363. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-73100-7_73

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation