• 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

不是我们这类人!党派偏见如何扭曲在推特(现为X)上对政治机器人的认知。

Not our kind of crowd! How partisan bias distorts perceptions of political bots on Twitter (now X).

作者信息

Lüders Adrian, Reiss Stefan, Dinkelberg Alejandro, MacCarron Pádraig, Quayle Michael

机构信息

School of Communication Studies, University of Hohenheim, Stuttgart, Germany.

Centre for Social Issues Research, University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland.

出版信息

Br J Soc Psychol. 2025 Apr;64(2):e12794. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12794. Epub 2024 Aug 29.

DOI:10.1111/bjso.12794
PMID:39206578
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11923938/
Abstract

Social bots, employed to manipulate public opinion, pose a novel threat to digital societies. Existing bot research has emphasized technological aspects while neglecting psychological factors shaping human-bot interactions. This research addresses this gap within the context of the US-American electorate. Two datasets provide evidence that partisanship distorts (a) online users' representation of bots, (b) their ability to identify them, and (c) their intentions to interact with them. Study 1 explores global bot perceptions on through survey data from N = 452 Twitter (now X) users. Results suggest that users tend to attribute bot-related dangers to political adversaries, rather than recognizing bots as a shared threat to political discourse. Study 2 (N = 619) evaluates the consequences of such misrepresentations for the quality of online interactions. In an online experiment, participants were asked to differentiate between human and bot profiles. Results indicate that partisan leanings explained systematic judgement errors. The same data suggest that participants aim to avoid interacting with bots. However, biased judgements may undermine this motivation in praxis. In sum, the presented findings underscore the importance of interdisciplinary strategies that consider technological and human factors to address the threats posed by bots in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.

摘要

用于操纵舆论的社交机器人对数字社会构成了新的威胁。现有的机器人研究侧重于技术方面,而忽视了塑造人机交互的心理因素。本研究在美国选民的背景下填补了这一空白。两个数据集提供了证据,表明党派偏见扭曲了(a)在线用户对机器人的认知,(b)他们识别机器人的能力,以及(c)他们与机器人互动的意图。研究1通过对N = 452名推特(现称X)用户的调查数据,探索了全球对机器人的认知。结果表明,用户倾向于将与机器人相关的危险归咎于政治对手,而不是将机器人视为对政治话语的共同威胁。研究2(N = 619)评估了这种错误认知对在线互动质量的影响。在一项在线实验中,参与者被要求区分人类和机器人资料。结果表明,党派倾向解释了系统性的判断错误。同样的数据表明,参与者旨在避免与机器人互动。然而,有偏见的判断可能会在实践中破坏这种动机。总之,所呈现的研究结果强调了跨学科策略的重要性,这些策略要考虑技术和人为因素,以应对在快速发展的数字环境中机器人带来的威胁。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c817/11923938/23107b5e2018/BJSO-64-0-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c817/11923938/8bddeb47036f/BJSO-64-0-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c817/11923938/23107b5e2018/BJSO-64-0-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c817/11923938/8bddeb47036f/BJSO-64-0-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/c817/11923938/23107b5e2018/BJSO-64-0-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
Not our kind of crowd! How partisan bias distorts perceptions of political bots on Twitter (now X).不是我们这类人!党派偏见如何扭曲在推特(现为X)上对政治机器人的认知。
Br J Soc Psychol. 2025 Apr;64(2):e12794. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12794. Epub 2024 Aug 29.
2
Psychological underpinnings of partisan bias in tie formation on social media.社交媒体上关系形成中党派偏见的心理基础。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 2025 Feb;154(2):378-390. doi: 10.1037/xge0001662. Epub 2024 Oct 14.
3
Social bots spoil activist sentiment without eroding engagement.社交机器人在不削弱参与度的情况下破坏了活动家的情绪。
Sci Rep. 2024 Nov 6;14(1):27005. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-74032-0.
4
Shared partisanship dramatically increases social tie formation in a Twitter field experiment.在一个 Twitter 现场实验中,共同的党派立场显著增加了社会联系的形成。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Feb 16;118(7). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2022761118.
5
Detecting Bots on Russian Political Twitter.检测俄罗斯政治推特上的机器人。
Big Data. 2017 Dec;5(4):310-324. doi: 10.1089/big.2017.0038.
6
A global comparison of social media bot and human characteristics.社交媒体机器人与人类特征的全球比较。
Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 31;15(1):10973. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-96372-1.
7
Collective Behavior of Social Bots Is Encoded in Their Temporal Twitter Activity.社交机器人的集体行为被编码在它们的推特活动时间中。
Big Data. 2018 Jun;6(2):113-123. doi: 10.1089/big.2017.0041.
8
Public Opinion Manipulation on Social Media: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Bots during the COVID-19 Pandemic.社交媒体上的舆论操纵:新冠疫情期间推特机器人的社交网络分析。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Dec 7;19(24):16376. doi: 10.3390/ijerph192416376.
9
Characterizing the role of bots' in polarized stance on social media.剖析机器人在社交媒体上两极化立场中的作用。
Soc Netw Anal Min. 2022;12(1):30. doi: 10.1007/s13278-022-00858-z. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
10
Duped by Bots: Why Some are Better than Others at Detecting Fake Social Media Personas.被机器人骗了:为什么有些人比其他人更善于发现假的社交媒体账号。
Hum Factors. 2024 Jan;66(1):88-102. doi: 10.1177/00187208211072642. Epub 2022 Feb 24.

本文引用的文献

1
Exposure to social bots amplifies perceptual biases and regulation propensity.接触社交机器人会放大感知偏见和调节倾向。
Sci Rep. 2023 Nov 24;13(1):20707. doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-46630-x.
2
Botometer 101: social bot practicum for computational social scientists.Botometer 101:面向计算社会科学家的社交机器人实践
J Comput Soc Sci. 2022;5(2):1511-1528. doi: 10.1007/s42001-022-00177-5. Epub 2022 Aug 20.
3
Becoming "us" in digital spaces: How online users creatively and strategically exploit social media affordances to build up social identity.
在数字空间中成为“我们”:在线用户如何创造性和策略性地利用社交媒体功能来建立社会认同。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2022 Aug;228:103643. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103643. Epub 2022 Jun 18.
4
How social media shapes polarization.社交媒体如何塑造极化现象。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2021 Nov;25(11):913-916. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.013. Epub 2021 Aug 21.
5
Out-group animosity drives engagement on social media.外群体敌意推动社交媒体参与度。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Jun 29;118(26). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2024292118.
6
Shared partisanship dramatically increases social tie formation in a Twitter field experiment.在一个 Twitter 现场实验中,共同的党派立场显著增加了社会联系的形成。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Feb 16;118(7). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2022761118.
7
Political sectarianism in America.美国的政治宗派主义。
Science. 2020 Oct 30;370(6516):533-536. doi: 10.1126/science.abe1715.
8
The spread of low-credibility content by social bots.社交机器人传播低可信度内容。
Nat Commun. 2018 Nov 20;9(1):4787. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7.
9
Bots increase exposure to negative and inflammatory content in online social systems.机器人增加了在线社交系统中负面和煽动性内容的曝光率。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018 Dec 4;115(49):12435-12440. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1803470115. Epub 2018 Nov 20.
10
At Least Bias Is Bipartisan: A Meta-Analytic Comparison of Partisan Bias in Liberals and Conservatives.至少偏见是两党都有的:对自由派和保守派党派偏见的元分析比较。
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2019 Mar;14(2):273-291. doi: 10.1177/1745691617746796. Epub 2018 May 31.