Cited by 54Misinformation and Its ImpactsComplex Network Analysis TechniquesPublic Relations and Crisis Communication

Using TwitterTrails.com to Investigate Rumor Propagation

Metaxas, Panagiotis Takas, Finn, Samantha, Mustafaraj, Eni·2015·Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference Companion on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing

Abstract

Social media have become part of modern news reporting, used by journalists to spread information and find sources, or as a news source by individuals. The quest for prominence and recognition on social media sites like Twitter can sometimes eclipse accuracy and lead to the spread of false information. As a way to study and react to this trend, we demo TWITTERTRAILS, an interactive, web-based tool (twittertrails.com) that allows users to investigate the origin and propagation characteristics of a rumor and its refutation, if any, on Twitter. Visualizations of burst activity, propagation timeline, retweet and co-retweeted networks help its users trace the spread of a story. Within minutes TWITTERTRAILS will collect relevant tweets and automatically answer several important questions regarding a rumor: its originator, burst characteristics, propagators and main actors according to the audience. In addition, it will compute and report the rumor's level of visibility and, as an example of the power of crowdsourcing, the audience's skepticism towards it which correlates with the rumor's credibility. We envision TWITTERTRAILS as valuable tool for individual use, and especially for amateur and professional journalists investigating recent and breaking stories.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/2685553.2702691

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • A rumour classification system that aggregates users' evolving collective judgements can help track a rumour's veracity status during collective sense-making.

    “a rumour classification system that aggregates the evolving, collective judgements posted by users can help track the veracity status of a rumour as it is exposed to this process of collective sense-making”

    From Detection and Resolution of Rumours in Social Media (2019) · cites this paper as Metaxas et al. 2015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Metaxas, P. T., Finn, S., & Mustafaraj, E.
Affiliations
Wellesley College (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference Companion on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing
Publisher
ACM
Published
2015-02-28
Pages
69-72
OpenAlex
W2129647236
Cited by
54
References
0
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5
FWCI
27.49
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellesley Science Trustees Fund
  • National Science Foundation (CNS-1117693)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
Keywords
rumor propagation, Twitter, rumor refutation, misinformation, social media, web-based visualization tool, burst activity, retweet networks, crowdsourcing, journalism

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