• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

网络上真实和虚假新闻的传播。

The spread of true and false news online.

机构信息

Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the Media Lab, E14-526, 75 Amherst Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.

MIT, E62-364, 100 Main Street, Cambridge, MA 02142, USA.

出版信息

Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559.

DOI:10.1126/science.aap9559
PMID:29590045
Abstract

We investigated the differential diffusion of all of the verified true and false news stories distributed on Twitter from 2006 to 2017. The data comprise ~126,000 stories tweeted by ~3 million people more than 4.5 million times. We classified news as true or false using information from six independent fact-checking organizations that exhibited 95 to 98% agreement on the classifications. Falsehood diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects were more pronounced for false political news than for false news about terrorism, natural disasters, science, urban legends, or financial information. We found that false news was more novel than true news, which suggests that people were more likely to share novel information. Whereas false stories inspired fear, disgust, and surprise in replies, true stories inspired anticipation, sadness, joy, and trust. Contrary to conventional wisdom, robots accelerated the spread of true and false news at the same rate, implying that false news spreads more than the truth because humans, not robots, are more likely to spread it.

摘要

我们研究了 2006 年至 2017 年在 Twitter 上发布的所有已核实的真假新闻故事的差异扩散。这些数据包括由超过 300 万人在 450 多万次推文中分享的约 126000 个故事。我们使用来自六个独立事实核查机构的信息将新闻分类为真实或虚假,这些机构在分类上的一致性达到 95%至 98%。在所有信息类别中,虚假信息的传播范围都明显大于真实信息,而且虚假政治新闻的传播效果比恐怖主义、自然灾害、科学、都市传说或金融信息的传播效果更为显著。我们发现,虚假新闻比真实新闻更新颖,这表明人们更有可能分享新颖的信息。而虚假故事在回复中引发了恐惧、厌恶和惊讶,真实故事则引发了期待、悲伤、喜悦和信任。与传统观点相反,机器人以相同的速度加速了真假新闻的传播,这意味着虚假新闻的传播速度超过了真实新闻,因为传播虚假新闻的不是机器人,而是人类。

相似文献

1
The spread of true and false news online.网络上真实和虚假新闻的传播。
Science. 2018 Mar 9;359(6380):1146-1151. doi: 10.1126/science.aap9559.
2
Emotions explain differences in the diffusion of true vs. false social media rumors.情绪解释了真实和虚假社交媒体谣言传播的差异。
Sci Rep. 2021 Nov 22;11(1):22721. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-01813-2.
3
Infodemics: Do healthcare professionals detect corona-related false news stories better than students?信息疫情:医护专业人员比学生更能识别与新冠相关的虚假新闻故事吗?
PLoS One. 2021 Mar 10;16(3):e0247517. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0247517. eCollection 2021.
4
Comparing information diffusion mechanisms by matching on cascade size.通过匹配级联大小来比较信息扩散机制。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Nov 16;118(46). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2100786118.
5
Misremembering Brexit: partisan bias and individual predictors of false memories for fake news stories among Brexit voters.记错英国脱欧:英国脱欧选民对假新闻故事产生虚假记忆的党派偏见和个体预测因素。
Memory. 2021 May;29(5):587-604. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2021.1923754. Epub 2021 May 10.
6
Partisans neither expect nor receive reputational rewards for sharing falsehoods over truth online.党派人士在网上分享虚假信息而非真相时,既不期待也不会获得声誉上的回报。
PNAS Nexus. 2024 Jul 24;3(8):pgae287. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgae287. eCollection 2024 Aug.
7
Engagement with fact-checked posts on Reddit.在Reddit上参与事实核查后的帖子。
PNAS Nexus. 2023 Jan 27;2(3):pgad018. doi: 10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad018. eCollection 2023 Mar.
8
Media literacy tips promoting reliable news improve discernment and enhance trust in traditional media.推广可靠新闻的媒体素养小贴士能提高辨别力并增强对传统媒体的信任。
Commun Psychol. 2024 Aug 14;2(1):74. doi: 10.1038/s44271-024-00121-5.
9
False News of a Cannabis Cancer Cure.大麻可治愈癌症的假新闻。
Cureus. 2019 Jan 19;11(1):e3918. doi: 10.7759/cureus.3918.
10
Understanding and combatting misinformation across 16 countries on six continents.理解并打击六大洲 16 个国家的错误信息。
Nat Hum Behav. 2023 Sep;7(9):1502-1513. doi: 10.1038/s41562-023-01641-6. Epub 2023 Jun 29.

引用本文的文献

1
["Global forgetting" and extreme communicative events].["全球遗忘"与极端交流事件]
Cad Saude Publica. 2025 Aug 22;41(8):e00048825. doi: 10.1590/0102-311XPT048825. eCollection 2025.
2
Dynamic fractional-order ISDR rumor propagation model incorporating refutation mechanism in complex networks.复杂网络中融入反驳机制的动态分数阶ISDR谣言传播模型
Sci Rep. 2025 Aug 24;15(1):31137. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-16369-8.
3
The Role of Influencers and Echo Chambers in the Diffusion of Vaccine Misinformation: Opinion Mining in a Taiwanese Online Community.
影响者和信息茧房在疫苗错误信息传播中的作用:台湾在线社区的观点挖掘
JMIR Infodemiology. 2025 Aug 18;5:e57951. doi: 10.2196/57951.
4
AI-driven disinformation: policy recommendations for democratic resilience.人工智能驱动的虚假信息:增强民主韧性的政策建议
Front Artif Intell. 2025 Jul 31;8:1569115. doi: 10.3389/frai.2025.1569115. eCollection 2025.
5
Challenging Reward Structures and Organizational Cultures that Propagate Stem Cell Hyperbole.具有挑战性的奖励结构和宣扬干细胞夸张说法的组织文化。
Stem Cell Rev Rep. 2025 Aug 18. doi: 10.1007/s12015-025-10955-z.
6
Learned Insignificance of Credibility Signs.可信度标志的习得性无意义。
Cogn Sci. 2025 Aug;49(8):e70102. doi: 10.1111/cogs.70102.
7
Development and validation of a questionnaire about fluoride knowledge.一份关于氟化物知识问卷的编制与验证
Braz Dent J. 2025 Aug 11;36:e246377. doi: 10.1590/0103-644020256377. eCollection 2025.
8
The Impact of Misinformation on Social Media in the Context of Natural Disasters: Narrative Review.自然灾害背景下社交媒体上错误信息的影响:叙述性综述
JMIR Infodemiology. 2025 Jul 31;5:e70413. doi: 10.2196/70413.
9
Who Cares How Information Feels? A Call for Digital Influence Literacy.谁在乎信息给人的感受?呼吁具备数字影响力素养。
Asian Bioeth Rev. 2025 Jun 6;17(3):477-493. doi: 10.1007/s41649-024-00350-0. eCollection 2025 Jul.
10
Evaluating the Feasibility of Web-Monitoring Methodology for Measuring Exposure to Online Cancer Misinformation.评估网络监测方法用于衡量在线癌症错误信息暴露程度的可行性。
JMIR Cancer. 2025 Jul 29;11:e65887. doi: 10.2196/65887.