The findings suggest that the words of millions of people on social media have considerable information about an event's credibility - even when an event is still ongoing.
"There have been many studies about social media credibility in recent years, but very little is known about what types of words or phrases create credibility perceptions during rapidly unfolding events," said Tanushree Mitra, a PhD candidate at Georgia Institute of Technology, who led the research.
They asked people to judge the posts on their credibility (from "certainly accurate" to "certainly inaccurate").
Then the team fed the words into a model that split them into 15 different linguistic categories. The classifications included positive and negative emotions, hedges and boosters, and anxiety.
The system then examined the words to judge if the tweets were credible or not. It matched the humans' opinions about 68 per cent of the time. That is significantly higher than the random baseline of 25 per cent, researchers said.
"Words indicating positive sentiment but mocking the impracticality of the event, such as 'ha,' 'grins' or 'joking,' were seen as less credible. So were hedge words, including 'certain level' and 'suspects'," she said.
Higher numbers of retweets also correlated with lower credibility scores. Replies and retweets with longer message lengths were thought to be more credible.
"It could be that longer message lengths provide more information or reasoning, so they're viewed as more trustworthy," she said.
"On the other hand, a higher number of retweets, which was scored lower on credibility, might represent an attempt to elicit collective reasoning during times of crisis or uncertainty," Mitra said.
"When combined with other signals, such as event topics or structural information, our linguistic result could be an important building block of an automated system," said Eric Gilbert, an assistant professor in Georgia Tech.
"Twitter is part of the problem with spreading untruthful news online. But it can also be part of the solution," said Gilbert.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
