Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter
For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of info...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Scientific reports 2020-04, Vol.10 (1), p.6599-6599, Article 6599 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 6599 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 6599 |
container_title | Scientific reports |
container_volume | 10 |
creator | Gargiulo, Floriana Cafiero, Florian Guille-Escuret, Paul Seror, Valérie Ward, Jeremy K. |
description | For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of information on vaccines on the French-speaking realm of Twitter between 2016 and 2017. Two major asymmetries appear. Rather than opposing themselves on each vaccine, defenders and critics focus on different vaccines and vaccine-related topics. Pro-vaccine accounts focus on hopes for new groundbreaking vaccines and on ongoing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Vaccine critics concentrate their posts on a limited number of “controversial” vaccines and adjuvants. Furthermore, vaccine-critical accounts display greater craft and energy, using a wider variety of sources, and a more coordinated set of hashtags. This double asymmetry can have serious consequences. Despite the presence of a large number of pro-vaccine accounts, some arguments raised by efficiently organized and very active vaccine-critical activists are left unanswered. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1038/s41598-020-62880-5 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7171088</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2393037692</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-8eb7b13ca923152f78ec77ed0c05aa2cacc2c71c89189ea9148feb334f46ab243</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UUtP3DAQtqpWBS38gR6qSL2UQ8DP2L5UWqFSkFbqhZ4tx5nsmm6c1PYu4t_XSyilHOqLR_4eM-MPoQ8EnxPM1EXiRGhVY4rrhiqFa_EGHVPMRU0ZpW9f1EfoNKU7XI6gmhP9Hh0xygjDpDlGbpkehgFy9K6abMze-clmP4Zq7KsOeggdxFTZ0FUu-gKnA7C3zvkAqcpjIbU2l7JIriIEt6nTBPanD-vq9t7nDPEEvevtNsHp071AP66-3l5e16vv324ul6vaCd7kWkErW8Kc1WU6QXupwEkJHXZYWEtd6UmdJE5pojRYTbjqoWWM97yxLeVsgb7MvtOuHaBzEHK0WzNFP9j4YEbrzb9I8BuzHvdGEkmwUsXgbDbYvJJdL1fm8IYZ1pxqsieF-_mpWRx_7SBlM_jkYLu1AcZdMpRphplsyjIL9OkV9W7cxVC-4sCinDRS4MKiM8vFMaUI_fMEBJtD5GaO3JTIzWPkRhTRx5crP0v-BFwIbCakAoU1xL-9_2P7G8H0t5I</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2392416750</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter</title><source>Nature Open Access</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Springer Nature OA/Free Journals</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Gargiulo, Floriana ; Cafiero, Florian ; Guille-Escuret, Paul ; Seror, Valérie ; Ward, Jeremy K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Gargiulo, Floriana ; Cafiero, Florian ; Guille-Escuret, Paul ; Seror, Valérie ; Ward, Jeremy K.</creatorcontrib><description>For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of information on vaccines on the French-speaking realm of Twitter between 2016 and 2017. Two major asymmetries appear. Rather than opposing themselves on each vaccine, defenders and critics focus on different vaccines and vaccine-related topics. Pro-vaccine accounts focus on hopes for new groundbreaking vaccines and on ongoing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Vaccine critics concentrate their posts on a limited number of “controversial” vaccines and adjuvants. Furthermore, vaccine-critical accounts display greater craft and energy, using a wider variety of sources, and a more coordinated set of hashtags. This double asymmetry can have serious consequences. Despite the presence of a large number of pro-vaccine accounts, some arguments raised by efficiently organized and very active vaccine-critical activists are left unanswered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2045-2322</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2045-2322</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-62880-5</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32313016</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Nature Publishing Group UK</publisher><subject>639/766/530/2801 ; 692/499 ; Adjuvants ; Humanities and Social Sciences ; Methods and statistics ; multidisciplinary ; Physics ; Physics and Society ; Science ; Science (multidisciplinary) ; Sociology ; Vaccines</subject><ispartof>Scientific reports, 2020-04, Vol.10 (1), p.6599-6599, Article 6599</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><rights>The Author(s) 2020. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-8eb7b13ca923152f78ec77ed0c05aa2cacc2c71c89189ea9148feb334f46ab243</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-8eb7b13ca923152f78ec77ed0c05aa2cacc2c71c89189ea9148feb334f46ab243</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-3389-6870 ; 0000-0001-8002-435X ; 0000-0002-1951-6942 ; 0000-0001-9813-1815</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171088/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7171088/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,41120,42189,51576,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32313016$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-03094291$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Gargiulo, Floriana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cafiero, Florian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guille-Escuret, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seror, Valérie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ward, Jeremy K.</creatorcontrib><title>Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter</title><title>Scientific reports</title><addtitle>Sci Rep</addtitle><addtitle>Sci Rep</addtitle><description>For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of information on vaccines on the French-speaking realm of Twitter between 2016 and 2017. Two major asymmetries appear. Rather than opposing themselves on each vaccine, defenders and critics focus on different vaccines and vaccine-related topics. Pro-vaccine accounts focus on hopes for new groundbreaking vaccines and on ongoing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Vaccine critics concentrate their posts on a limited number of “controversial” vaccines and adjuvants. Furthermore, vaccine-critical accounts display greater craft and energy, using a wider variety of sources, and a more coordinated set of hashtags. This double asymmetry can have serious consequences. Despite the presence of a large number of pro-vaccine accounts, some arguments raised by efficiently organized and very active vaccine-critical activists are left unanswered.</description><subject>639/766/530/2801</subject><subject>692/499</subject><subject>Adjuvants</subject><subject>Humanities and Social Sciences</subject><subject>Methods and statistics</subject><subject>multidisciplinary</subject><subject>Physics</subject><subject>Physics and Society</subject><subject>Science</subject><subject>Science (multidisciplinary)</subject><subject>Sociology</subject><subject>Vaccines</subject><issn>2045-2322</issn><issn>2045-2322</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>C6C</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UUtP3DAQtqpWBS38gR6qSL2UQ8DP2L5UWqFSkFbqhZ4tx5nsmm6c1PYu4t_XSyilHOqLR_4eM-MPoQ8EnxPM1EXiRGhVY4rrhiqFa_EGHVPMRU0ZpW9f1EfoNKU7XI6gmhP9Hh0xygjDpDlGbpkehgFy9K6abMze-clmP4Zq7KsOeggdxFTZ0FUu-gKnA7C3zvkAqcpjIbU2l7JIriIEt6nTBPanD-vq9t7nDPEEvevtNsHp071AP66-3l5e16vv324ul6vaCd7kWkErW8Kc1WU6QXupwEkJHXZYWEtd6UmdJE5pojRYTbjqoWWM97yxLeVsgb7MvtOuHaBzEHK0WzNFP9j4YEbrzb9I8BuzHvdGEkmwUsXgbDbYvJJdL1fm8IYZ1pxqsieF-_mpWRx_7SBlM_jkYLu1AcZdMpRphplsyjIL9OkV9W7cxVC-4sCinDRS4MKiM8vFMaUI_fMEBJtD5GaO3JTIzWPkRhTRx5crP0v-BFwIbCakAoU1xL-9_2P7G8H0t5I</recordid><startdate>20200420</startdate><enddate>20200420</enddate><creator>Gargiulo, Floriana</creator><creator>Cafiero, Florian</creator><creator>Guille-Escuret, Paul</creator><creator>Seror, Valérie</creator><creator>Ward, Jeremy K.</creator><general>Nature Publishing Group UK</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</general><scope>C6C</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88A</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>1XC</scope><scope>BXJBU</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3389-6870</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8002-435X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1951-6942</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9813-1815</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20200420</creationdate><title>Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter</title><author>Gargiulo, Floriana ; Cafiero, Florian ; Guille-Escuret, Paul ; Seror, Valérie ; Ward, Jeremy K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-8eb7b13ca923152f78ec77ed0c05aa2cacc2c71c89189ea9148feb334f46ab243</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>639/766/530/2801</topic><topic>692/499</topic><topic>Adjuvants</topic><topic>Humanities and Social Sciences</topic><topic>Methods and statistics</topic><topic>multidisciplinary</topic><topic>Physics</topic><topic>Physics and Society</topic><topic>Science</topic><topic>Science (multidisciplinary)</topic><topic>Sociology</topic><topic>Vaccines</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Gargiulo, Floriana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cafiero, Florian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guille-Escuret, Paul</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seror, Valérie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ward, Jeremy K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Springer Nature OA/Free Journals</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Biology Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><collection>HAL-SHS: Archive ouverte en Sciences de l'Homme et de la Société</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Scientific reports</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Gargiulo, Floriana</au><au>Cafiero, Florian</au><au>Guille-Escuret, Paul</au><au>Seror, Valérie</au><au>Ward, Jeremy K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter</atitle><jtitle>Scientific reports</jtitle><stitle>Sci Rep</stitle><addtitle>Sci Rep</addtitle><date>2020-04-20</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>6599</spage><epage>6599</epage><pages>6599-6599</pages><artnum>6599</artnum><issn>2045-2322</issn><eissn>2045-2322</eissn><abstract>For more than a decade, doubt about vaccines has become an increasingly important global issue. Polarization of opinions on this matter, especially through social media, has been repeatedly observed, but details about the balance of forces are left unclear. In this paper, we analyse the flow of information on vaccines on the French-speaking realm of Twitter between 2016 and 2017. Two major asymmetries appear. Rather than opposing themselves on each vaccine, defenders and critics focus on different vaccines and vaccine-related topics. Pro-vaccine accounts focus on hopes for new groundbreaking vaccines and on ongoing outbreaks of vaccine-preventable illnesses. Vaccine critics concentrate their posts on a limited number of “controversial” vaccines and adjuvants. Furthermore, vaccine-critical accounts display greater craft and energy, using a wider variety of sources, and a more coordinated set of hashtags. This double asymmetry can have serious consequences. Despite the presence of a large number of pro-vaccine accounts, some arguments raised by efficiently organized and very active vaccine-critical activists are left unanswered.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Nature Publishing Group UK</pub><pmid>32313016</pmid><doi>10.1038/s41598-020-62880-5</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3389-6870</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8002-435X</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1951-6942</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9813-1815</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2045-2322 |
ispartof | Scientific reports, 2020-04, Vol.10 (1), p.6599-6599, Article 6599 |
issn | 2045-2322 2045-2322 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_7171088 |
source | Nature Open Access; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; PubMed Central; Springer Nature OA/Free Journals; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
subjects | 639/766/530/2801 692/499 Adjuvants Humanities and Social Sciences Methods and statistics multidisciplinary Physics Physics and Society Science Science (multidisciplinary) Sociology Vaccines |
title | Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T02%3A22%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Asymmetric%20participation%20of%20defenders%20and%20critics%20of%20vaccines%20to%20debates%20on%20French-speaking%20Twitter&rft.jtitle=Scientific%20reports&rft.au=Gargiulo,%20Floriana&rft.date=2020-04-20&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=6599&rft.epage=6599&rft.pages=6599-6599&rft.artnum=6599&rft.issn=2045-2322&rft.eissn=2045-2322&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/s41598-020-62880-5&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2393037692%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2392416750&rft_id=info:pmid/32313016&rfr_iscdi=true |