Angry but Accurate: Detecting and Profiling the Counter-Misinformation Ecosystem on Twitter

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.02900v1
• Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2026 02:52:50 GMT
• Title: Angry but Accurate: Detecting and Profiling the Counter-Misinformation Ecosystem on Twitter
• Abstract summary: We find that anti-misinformation posts are more emotionally negative than pro-misinformation posts.<n>These differences are modest in magnitude but consistent in direction across the negative emotions.<n>We also find that posts opposing misinformation tend to come from more established users.
• Score: 8.55996385205646
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: On social media, many users actively push back against false claims. Understanding who pushes back and how they do so matters, as this corrective activity is central to how misinformation is contested. We study this counter-misinformation ecosystem at scale: applying a domain-specific NLI model from our prior work to a large corpus of COVID-19 tweets, we classify 264,737 posts as supporting or opposing false claims and compare 23 user- and text-level features across the two groups. Contrary to the dominant assumption that negative emotion is a signature of falsehood, we find that anti-misinformation posts are more emotionally negative than pro-misinformation posts, with higher levels of anger, disgust, and sadness. These differences are modest in magnitude but consistent in direction across the negative emotions. We also find that posts opposing misinformation tend to come from more established users, i.e., older accounts, more followers, and higher listed counts.

Related papers

• DISHONEST: Dissecting misInformation Spread using Homogeneous sOcial NEtworks and Semantic Topic classification [2.6356166840419717]
  COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a significant rise in spread of misinformation on online platforms such as Twitter.<n>We use Twitter's network of retweets to study social interactions and topic modeling to study tweet content.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-12T18:53:46Z)
• Differential impact from individual versus collective misinformation tagging on the diversity of Twitter (X) information engagement and mobility [3.236485341473765]
  In Twitter's new feature, Community Notes, misinformation tagging was peer-reviewed by other fact-checkers before revelation to the poster.<n>With collective misinformation tagging, posters were less likely to retreat from diverse information engagement.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-19T09:52:44Z)
• Adherence to Misinformation on Social Media Through Socio-Cognitive and Group-Based Processes [79.79659145328856]
  We argue that when misinformation proliferates, this happens because the social media environment enables adherence to misinformation. We make the case that polarization and misinformation adherence are closely tied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T12:34:24Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• Misinfo Belief Frames: A Case Study on Covid & Climate News [49.979419711713795]
  We propose a formalism for understanding how readers perceive the reliability of news and the impact of misinformation. We introduce the Misinfo Belief Frames (MBF) corpus, a dataset of 66k inferences over 23.5k headlines. Our results using large-scale language modeling to predict misinformation frames show that machine-generated inferences can influence readers' trust in news headlines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T09:50:11Z)
• Predicting Misinformation and Engagement in COVID-19 Twitter Discourse in the First Months of the Outbreak [1.2059055685264957]
  We examine nearly 505K COVID-19-related tweets from the initial months of the pandemic to understand misinformation as a function of bot-behavior and engagement. We found that real users tweet both facts and misinformation, while bots tweet proportionally more misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-03T18:47:34Z)
• The Role of the Crowd in Countering Misinformation: A Case Study of the COVID-19 Infodemic [15.885290526721544]
  We focus on tweets related to the COVID-19 pandemic, analyzing the spread of misinformation, professional fact checks, and the crowd response to popular misleading claims about COVID-19. We train a classifier to create a novel dataset of 155,468 COVID-19-related tweets, containing 33,237 false claims and 33,413 refuting arguments. We observe that the surge in misinformation tweets results in a quick response and a corresponding increase in tweets that refute such misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-11T13:48:44Z)
• Right and left, partisanship predicts (asymmetric) vulnerability to misinformation [71.46564239895892]
  We analyze the relationship between partisanship, echo chambers, and vulnerability to online misinformation by studying news sharing behavior on Twitter. We find that vulnerability to misinformation is most strongly influenced by partisanship for both left- and right-leaning users.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-04T01:36:14Z)
• Information Consumption and Social Response in a Segregated Environment: the Case of Gab [74.5095691235917]
  This work provides a characterization of the interaction patterns within Gab around the COVID-19 topic. We find that there are no strong statistical differences in the social response to questionable and reliable content. Our results provide insights toward the understanding of coordinated inauthentic behavior and on the early-warning of information operation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T11:34:25Z)
• An Exploratory Study of COVID-19 Misinformation on Twitter [5.070542698701158]
  During the COVID-19 pandemic, social media has become a home ground for misinformation. We have conducted an exploratory study into the propagation, authors and content of misinformation on Twitter around the topic of COVID-19.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-12T12:07:35Z)
• Echo Chambers on Social Media: A comparative analysis [64.2256216637683]
  We introduce an operational definition of echo chambers and perform a massive comparative analysis on 1B pieces of contents produced by 1M users on four social media platforms. We infer the leaning of users about controversial topics and reconstruct their interaction networks by analyzing different features. We find support for the hypothesis that platforms implementing news feed algorithms like Facebook may elicit the emergence of echo-chambers.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-20T20:00:27Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.