Cited by 229Misinformation and Its ImpactsSpam and Phishing DetectionComplex Network Analysis Techniques

Fake News Detection in Social Networks via Crowd Signals

Open access
Tschiatschek, Sebastian, Singla, Adish, Gomez Rodriguez, Manuel, Merchant, Arpit, Krause, Andreas·2018·Companion of the The Web Conference 2018 on The Web Conference 2018 - WWW '18

Abstract

Our work considers leveraging crowd signals for detecting fake news and is motivated by tools recently introduced by Facebook that enable users to flag fake news. By aggregating users' flags, our goal is to select a small subset of news every day, send them to an expert (e.g., via a third-party fact-checking organization), and stop the spread of news identified as fake by an expert. The main objective of our work is to minimize the spread of misinformation by stopping the propagation of fake news in the network. It is especially challenging to achieve this objective as it requires detecting fake news with high-confidence as quickly as possible. We show that in order to leverage users' flags efficiently, it is crucial to learn about users' flagging accuracy. We develop a novel algorithm, DETECTIVE, that performs Bayesian inference for detecting fake news and jointly learns about users' flagging accuracy over time. Our algorithm employs posterior sampling to actively trade off exploitation (selecting news that maximize the objective value at a given epoch) and exploration (selecting news that maximize the value of information towards learning about users' flagging accuracy). We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach via extensive experiments and show the power of leveraging community signals for fake news detection.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3184558.3188722

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Crowdsourcing methods use the combined input and signals from many individuals to pool collective intelligence for detecting false content and limiting misinformation.

    “These approaches rely on the collective contributions and crowd signals (Tschiatschek et al. 2018) of a group of people for the aggregation of crowd intelligence to detect fake news (Tchakounté et al. 2020) and to reduce the spread of misinformation on social media (Pennycook and Rand 2019; Micallef et al. 2020).”

    From Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review (2023) · cites this paper as Tschiatschek et al. 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Qingyuan Zhao, Murat A. Erdogdu, Hera Y. He, Anand Rajaraman, and Jure Leskovec. 2015. SEISMIC: A Self-Exciting Point Process Model for Predicting Tweet Popularity. In KDD. 1513-1522.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tschiatschek, S., Singla, A., Gomez Rodriguez, M., Merchant, A., & Krause, A.
Affiliations
  • Microsoft Research (United Kingdom) (GB)
  • Max Planck Institute for Software Systems (DE)
  • MPI-SWS, Kaiserslautern, Germany
  • International Institute of Information Technology, Hyderabad (IN)
  • ETH Zurich (CH)
Venue
Companion of the The Web Conference 2018 on The Web Conference 2018 - WWW '18
Publisher
ACM Press
Published
2018
Pages
517-524
OpenAlex
W2793255598
Cited by
229
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 48 · 2019: 39 · 2018: 9
FWCI
99.04
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Microsoft Research
  • Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
  • FP7 Ideas: European Research Council (307036)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Spam and Phishing Detection
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
Keywords
fake news detection, misinformation spread, fact-checking, Bayesian inference, posterior sampling, exploration-exploitation balance, social networks

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