The DOI matches its Crossref record; 75 of the 75 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Unpacking the Social Media Bot: A Typology to Guide Research and Policy
Open accessAbstract
Amid widespread reports of digital influence operations during major elections, policymakers, scholars, and journalists have become increasingly interested in the political impact of social media bots. Most recently, platform companies like Facebook and Twitter have been summoned to testify about bots as part of investigations into digitally enabled foreign manipulation during the 2016 U.S. Presidential election. Facing mounting pressure from both the public and from legislators, these companies have been instructed to crack down on apparently malicious bot accounts. But as this article demonstrates, since the earliest writings on bots in the 1990s, there has been substantial confusion as to exactly what a “bot” is and what it does. We argue that multiple forms of ambiguity are responsible for much of the complexity underlying contemporary bot‐related policy, and that before successful policy interventions can be formulated, a more comprehensive understanding of bots—especially how they are defined and measured—will be needed. In this article, we provide a typology of different types of bots, provide clear guidelines for better categorizing political automation, and unpack the impact that it can have on contemporary technology policy. We conclude by outlining the main challenges and ambiguities that will face both researchers and legislators as they tackle bots in the future.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“the general trend of deploying bots in large scale for political interference and influence [44]”
From Future directions for chatbot research: An interdisciplinary research agenda (2021) · cites this paper as [44]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847 · cited 1×
“Quantitative studies have recently made notable progress in the ability to identify and measure bot influence on the diffusion of political messages, providing promising directions for future work (Vosoughi et al. 2018).”
BackgroundELIZA—a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine
Weizenbaum, J. (1966) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/365153.365168 · Cited by 4,452
Concept Misformation in Comparative Politics
Sartori, G. (1970) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1958356 · Cited by 3,318 · cited 1×
“Researchers hoping to contribute to these policy discussions have been hindered by a clear lack of conceptual clarity, akin to the phenomenon known by social scientists as concept misformation or category ambiguity (Sartori 1970).”
BackgroundFerrara, E., Varol, O., Davis, C., Menczer, F., & Flammini, A. (2016) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/2818717 · Cited by 1,973
Çömlekçi, M. F. (2019) · Kırklareli University Institutional Repository (Kırklareli University) · Cited by 1,606
The Fourth Revolution: How the infosphere is reshaping human reality
Floridi, L. (2014) · International Linear Collider · Cited by 1,216
KING, G., PAN, J., & ROBERTS, M. E. (2017) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055417000144 · Cited by 1,028
Social bots distort the 2016 U.S. Presidential election online discussion
Bessi, A., & Ferrara, E. (2016) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v21i11.7090 · Cited by 993
Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online
Lewis, B., & Marwick, A. E. (2017) · Cited by 932
BotOrNot: A System to Evaluate Social Bots
Davis, C. A., Varol, O., Ferrara, E., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2016) · Proceedings of the 25th International Conference Companion on World Wide Web - WWW 16 Companion · doi:10.1145/2872518.2889302 · Cited by 909
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Adams T.2017. “AI‐Powered Social Bots.” arXiv:1706.05143 [Cs]. June.http://arxiv.org/abs/1706.05143. · arXiv
- Bogost I., 2009, Proceedings of the Digital Arts and Culture Conference, 12
- Gorwa R.2017. “Computational Propaganda in Poland: False Amplifiers and the Digital Public Sphere.” Project on Computational Propaganda Working Paper Series Oxford UK.comprop.oii.ox.ac.uk.
- Hogan B.2012. “Pseudonyms and the Rise of the Real‐Name Web.” SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2229365. Rochester NY: Social Science Research Network.https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract = 2229365.
- Lazarsfeld P.F., 1957, Qualitative Measurement in the Social Sciences: Classification, Typologies, and Indices
- Shao C. G.L.Ciampaglia O.Varol A.Flammini andF.Menczer.2017. “The Spread of Fake News by Social Bots.” arXiv:1707.07592 [Physics]. July.http://arxiv.org/abs/1707.07592. · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2019) · doi:10.1080/1369118x.2019.1573914 · Cited by 719
Self-citationSocial Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization
Barberá, P. (2020) · Social Media and Democracy · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.004 · Cited by 373
Tubaro, P., Casilli, A. A., & Coville, M. (2020) · Big Data & Society · doi:10.1177/2053951720919776 · Cited by 262
Future directions for chatbot research: An interdisciplinary research agenda
Følstad, A., Araujo, T., Law, E. L.-C., Brandtzaeg, P. B., Papadopoulos, S., Reis, L., Baez, M., Laban, G., McAllister, P., Ischen, C., et al. (2021) · Computing · doi:10.1007/s00607-021-01016-7 · Cited by 247
Detection of Bots in Social Media: A Systematic Review
Orabi, M., Mouheb, D., Aghbari, Z. A., & Kamel, I. (2020) · Information Processing & Management · doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2020.102250 · Cited by 232
Metadata
- Authors
- Gorwa, R., & Guilbeault, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- Venue
- Policy & Internet
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2018-08-10
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 225-248
- ISSN
- 1944-2866 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2953122191
- Cited by
- 270
- References
- 75
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 61 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 52.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Policy & Internet (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
- Keywords
- social bots, election interference, 2016 US presidential election, technology policy, platform companies, Facebook, Twitter
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
