Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

The role and influence of perceived experts in an anti-vaccine misinformation community

View ORCID ProfileMallory J. Harris, View ORCID ProfileRyan Murtfeldt, View ORCID ProfileShufan Wang, View ORCID ProfileErin A. Mordecai, View ORCID ProfileJevin D. West
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.12.23292568
Mallory J. Harris
1Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
2Center for an Informed Public, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mallory J. Harris
  • For correspondence: mharris9{at}stanford.edu
Ryan Murtfeldt
3Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ryan Murtfeldt
Shufan Wang
3Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Shufan Wang
Erin A. Mordecai
1Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Erin A. Mordecai
Jevin D. West
2Center for an Informed Public, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
3Information School, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jevin D. West
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

1 Abstract

The role of perceived experts (i.e., medical professionals and biomedical scientists) as potential anti-vaccine influencers has not been characterized systematically. We describe the prevalence and importance of anti-vaccine perceived experts by constructing a coengagement network based on a Twitter data set containing over 4.2 million posts from April 2021. The coengagement network primarily broke into two large communities that differed in their stance toward COVID-19 vaccines, and misinformation was predominantly shared by the anti-vaccine community. Perceived experts had a sizable presence within the anti-vaccine community and shared academic sources at higher rates compared to others in that community. Perceived experts occupied important network positions as central anti-vaccine nodes and bridges between the anti- and pro-vaccine communities. Perceived experts received significantly more engagements than other individuals within the anti- and pro-vaccine communities and there was no significant difference in the influence boost for perceived experts between the two communities. Interventions designed to reduce the impact of perceived experts who spread anti-vaccine misinformation may be warranted.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Clinical Protocols

https://osf.io/6u3rn

Funding Statement

MJH was funded by the Achievement Rewards for College Scientists Scholarship, the National Institutes of Health (R35GM133439), the University of Washington's Center for an Informed Public, and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation. RM was funded by the Bryce and Bonnie Nelson Fellowship . EAM was funded by the National Science Foundation (DEB-2011147, with the Fogarty International Center), the National Institutes of Health (R35GM133439, R01AI168097, and R01AI102918), the Stanford King Center on Global Development, Woods Institute for the Environment, Center for Innovation in Global Health, and the Terman Award. JDW was funded by the Knight Foundation and the National Science Foundation grants 2120496 and 2230616.

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The Institutional Review Board of Washington University determined that this study (STUDY00017030) was exempt.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Corrected results section 2 on academic link-sharing. Prior version only accounted for pre-print sharing rather than pre-print and academic journals.

Data Availability

Code and data used to conduct main analyses and reproduce figures are available on Github at: https://github.com/mjharris95/perceived-experts. As explained in the repository, users were anonymized throughout the analysis and in the dataset. Additionally information may be provided by the corresponding author on reasonable request.

https://github.com/mjharris95/perceived-experts

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC 4.0 International license.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted August 29, 2023.
Download PDF
Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The role and influence of perceived experts in an anti-vaccine misinformation community
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
The role and influence of perceived experts in an anti-vaccine misinformation community
Mallory J. Harris, Ryan Murtfeldt, Shufan Wang, Erin A. Mordecai, Jevin D. West
medRxiv 2023.07.12.23292568; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.12.23292568
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
The role and influence of perceived experts in an anti-vaccine misinformation community
Mallory J. Harris, Ryan Murtfeldt, Shufan Wang, Erin A. Mordecai, Jevin D. West
medRxiv 2023.07.12.23292568; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.12.23292568

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Public and Global Health
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (434)
  • Allergy and Immunology (760)
  • Anesthesia (222)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (3316)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (366)
  • Dermatology (282)
  • Emergency Medicine (480)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (1175)
  • Epidemiology (13403)
  • Forensic Medicine (19)
  • Gastroenterology (900)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (5182)
  • Geriatric Medicine (483)
  • Health Economics (786)
  • Health Informatics (3286)
  • Health Policy (1146)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (1199)
  • Hematology (432)
  • HIV/AIDS (1024)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (14657)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (917)
  • Medical Education (478)
  • Medical Ethics (128)
  • Nephrology (526)
  • Neurology (4957)
  • Nursing (263)
  • Nutrition (735)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (889)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (797)
  • Oncology (2531)
  • Ophthalmology (730)
  • Orthopedics (284)
  • Otolaryngology (348)
  • Pain Medicine (323)
  • Palliative Medicine (90)
  • Pathology (547)
  • Pediatrics (1308)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (552)
  • Primary Care Research (559)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (4225)
  • Public and Global Health (7526)
  • Radiology and Imaging (1717)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (1022)
  • Respiratory Medicine (982)
  • Rheumatology (480)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (500)
  • Sports Medicine (425)
  • Surgery (551)
  • Toxicology (73)
  • Transplantation (237)
  • Urology (206)