Fake News Detection via Wisdom of Synthetic & Representative Crowds

François t'Serstevens, Roberto Cerina, Giulia Piccillo
{"title":"Fake News Detection via Wisdom of Synthetic & Representative Crowds","authors":"François t'Serstevens, Roberto Cerina, Giulia Piccillo","doi":"arxiv-2408.03154","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social media companies have struggled to provide a democratically legitimate\ndefinition of \"Fake News\". Reliance on expert judgment has attracted criticism\ndue to a general trust deficit and political polarisation. Approaches reliant\non the ``wisdom of the crowds'' are a cost-effective, transparent and inclusive\nalternative. This paper provides a novel end-to-end methodology to detect fake\nnews on X via \"wisdom of the synthetic & representative crowds\". We deploy an\nonline survey on the Lucid platform to gather veracity assessments for a number\nof pandemic-related tweets from crowd-workers. Borrowing from the MrP\nliterature, we train a Hierarchical Bayesian model to predict the veracity of\neach tweet from the perspective of different personae from the population of\ninterest. We then weight the predicted veracity assessments according to a\nrepresentative stratification frame, such that decisions about ``fake'' tweets\nare representative of the overall polity of interest. Based on these aggregated\nscores, we analyse a corpus of tweets and perform a second MrP to generate\nstate-level estimates of the number of people who share fake news. We find\nsmall but statistically meaningful heterogeneity in fake news sharing across US\nstates. At the individual-level: i. sharing fake news is generally rare, with\nan average sharing probability interval [0.07,0.14]; ii. strong evidence that\nDemocrats share less fake news, accounting for a reduction in the sharing odds\nof [57.3%,3.9%] relative to the average user; iii. when Republican definitions\nof fake news are used, it is the latter who show a decrease in the propensity\nto share fake news worth [50.8%, 2.0%]; iv. some evidence that women share less\nfake news than men, an effect worth a [29.5%,4.9%] decrease.","PeriodicalId":501112,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Computers and Society","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Computers and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.03154","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Social media companies have struggled to provide a democratically legitimate definition of "Fake News". Reliance on expert judgment has attracted criticism due to a general trust deficit and political polarisation. Approaches reliant on the ``wisdom of the crowds'' are a cost-effective, transparent and inclusive alternative. This paper provides a novel end-to-end methodology to detect fake news on X via "wisdom of the synthetic & representative crowds". We deploy an online survey on the Lucid platform to gather veracity assessments for a number of pandemic-related tweets from crowd-workers. Borrowing from the MrP literature, we train a Hierarchical Bayesian model to predict the veracity of each tweet from the perspective of different personae from the population of interest. We then weight the predicted veracity assessments according to a representative stratification frame, such that decisions about ``fake'' tweets are representative of the overall polity of interest. Based on these aggregated scores, we analyse a corpus of tweets and perform a second MrP to generate state-level estimates of the number of people who share fake news. We find small but statistically meaningful heterogeneity in fake news sharing across US states. At the individual-level: i. sharing fake news is generally rare, with an average sharing probability interval [0.07,0.14]; ii. strong evidence that Democrats share less fake news, accounting for a reduction in the sharing odds of [57.3%,3.9%] relative to the average user; iii. when Republican definitions of fake news are used, it is the latter who show a decrease in the propensity to share fake news worth [50.8%, 2.0%]; iv. some evidence that women share less fake news than men, an effect worth a [29.5%,4.9%] decrease.
通过 "合成智慧 "和 "代表性人群 "检测假新闻
社交媒体公司一直在努力为 "假新闻 "提供一个民主合法的定义。由于普遍信任缺失和政治两极化,依赖专家判断的做法招致批评。依靠 "群众智慧 "的方法是一种具有成本效益、透明和包容性的替代方法。本文提供了一种新颖的端到端方法,通过 "合成和代表性人群的智慧 "来检测 X 上的虚假新闻。我们在 Lucid 平台上部署了一个在线调查,以收集人群工作者对一些与流行病相关的推文的真实性评估。我们借鉴了 "文学先生"(MrPliterature)的方法,训练了一个层次贝叶斯模型(Hierarchical Bayesian Model),从相关人群中不同角色的角度预测每条推文的真实性。然后,我们根据具有代表性的分层框架对预测的真实性评估进行加权,从而使有关 "假 "推文的决定能够代表所关注的整体政体。基于这些综合分数,我们分析了推文语料库,并进行了第二次MrP,以生成分享假新闻的人数的国家级估计值。我们发现美国各州在假新闻分享方面存在微小但有统计意义的异质性。在个人层面上:i. 分享假新闻的人一般很少,平均分享概率区间为 [0.07,0.14];ii. 有强有力的证据表明民主党人分享的假新闻较少,与普通用户相比,其分享概率降低了 [57.3%,3.9%];iii.当使用共和党人的假新闻定义时,共和党人分享假新闻的倾向降低了 [50.8%, 2.0%];iv. 一些证据表明,女性比男性分享的假新闻更少,其影响降低了 [29.5%, 4.9%]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信