Protecting elections from social media manipulation
Abstract
Rigorous causal analysis could help harden democracy against future attacks
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The human versus non-human classification is based on a well-established deep learning algorithm with state-of-the-art accuracy.
“It is based on a well established algorithm based on deep learning 37 with state-of-the-art accuracy 15,41 .”
From Assessing the risks of ‘infodemics’ in response to COVID-19 epidemics (2020) · cites this paper as [37]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 209
- Authors
- Aral, S., & Eckles, D.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- Science
- Published
- 2019-08-30
- Volume
- 365
- Issue
- 6456
- Pages
- 858-861
- ISSN
- 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-9203
- OpenAlex
- W2970610561
- Cited by
- 209
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 3
- FWCI
- 51.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Social Media and Politics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
- Keywords
- election interference, social media manipulation, disinformation, democracy, causal analysis, electoral integrity
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
