Riccardo Gallotti
LightNews LightNews
banner
ricgallotti.bsky.social
Riccardo Gallotti
@ricgallotti.bsky.social
620 followers 190 following 9 posts
Interdisciplinary physicist
Head of the CHuB research unit at FBK

Human behaviour, mobility, transport, decision making, infodemics, data science
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Riccardo Gallotti
chub-fbk.bsky.social
The studies presented analyse respectively:
Twitter by @annabertani.bsky.social
Telegram by @tlouf.bsky.social
Mastodon by @arregui.bsky.social
Youtube by @matteoscianna.bsky.social
#CCS2025
September 3, 2025 at 5:21 PM
Reposted by Riccardo Gallotti
vtraag.bsky.social
This research was done by @luzuzek.bsky.social zek.bsky.social, Juan Pablo Bascur, @annabertani.bsky.social, and @ricgallotti.bsky.social. This project is supported by European Media and Information Fund.

⤴️
vtraag.bsky.social Vincent Traag @vtraag.bsky.social · Jul 4
New preprint! 🚨

We study the interaction between misinformation and science on Twitter during COVID-19 based on ~407M tweets. Both science and misinformation featured prominently during the pandemic, but the interaction between the two has not been studied on this scale before.

🧵 (1/10)
Mapping the interaction between science and misinformation in COVID-19 tweets. Publication from @luzuzek.bsky.social, Juan Pablo Bascur, @annabertani.bsky.social, @ricgallotti.bsky.social. This project is supported by European Media and Information Fund. Abstract: During the COVID-19 pandemic, scientific understanding related to the topic evolved rapidly. Along with scientific information being discussed widely, a large circulation of false information, labelled an infodemic by the WHO, emerged. Here, we study the interaction between misinformation and science on Twitter (now X) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We built a comprehensive database of 407M COVID-19 related tweets and classified the reliability of URLs in the tweets based on Media Bias/Fact Check. In addition, we use Altmetric data to see whether a tweet refers to a scientific publication. We find that many users find that many users share both scientific and unreliable content; out of the 1.2M users who share science, also share unreliable content. Publications that are more frequently shared by users who also share unreliable content are more likely to be preprints, slightly more often retracted, have fewer citations, and are published in lower-impact journals on average. Our findings suggest that misinformation is not related to a ``deficit'' of science. In addition, our findings raise some critical questions about certain open science practices and their potential for misuse. Given the fundamental opposition between science and misinformation, our findings highlight the necessity for proactive scientific engagement on social media platforms to counter false narratives during global crises.
July 4, 2025 at 10:40 AM
ricgallotti.bsky.social
I'm also very happy that this conference brought me back just a few hundred meters from where I used to live in the 5th arrondissement. (And no, I wasn't rich - I was sharing a triple room!)
June 25, 2025 at 11:43 AM