This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license.
Authors:
(1) Aleksandra Urman, She is a corresponding author from Department of Informatics, University of Zurich, Switzerland;
(2) Mykola Makhortykh, Institute of Communication and Media Studies, University of Bern, Switzerland;
(3) Roberto Ulloa, GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Germany;
(4) Juhi Kulshrestha, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany. Table of Links Abstract and Introduction
Web search results: biases, inaccuracies and their consequences
Conspiracy theories in the online environments
Research questions
Methodology
Results
Discussion
Limitations
Conclusion and Bibliography Conspiracy theories in the online environments Multiple studies suggest that the rise of online platforms have been conducive to the broader circulation and proliferation of conspiracy theories (Stano, 2020). While this suggestion has been criticized (e.g., by arguing that conspiracy theories can convince only those who already have predispositions to believe in them, Uscinski et al., 2018), even critics agree that the internet amplifies the spread of conspiratorial information and facilitates exposure to it even for individuals who do not hold conspiratorial ideas (Uscinski et al., 2018). While the spread of conspiratorial content by itself is unlikely to make the society as a whole to believe conspiracy theories, it is nevertheless concerning. It can increase belief in conspiracy theories in those parts of the population that have relevant predispositions. The spread of conspiratorial content might not lead to striking increases in the share of people who believe in conspiracy theories (Douglas et al., 2019), but it can have other problematic societal consequences such as decreasing prosocial behaviour and acceptance of science (van der Linden, 2015). Broad circulation and “normalization” of conspiratorial information (Aupers, 2012) in the online environments has prompted increased scholarly interest in the phenomenon (for an overview see Douglas et al., 2019). Over the last decade, a range of studies has explored the way conspiracy theories are spread and discussed online (e.g., Bessi et al., 2015; Harambam, 2021; Lewandowsky et al., 2013; Mahl et al., 2021; Metaxas and Finn, n.d.; Mohammed, 2019; Röchert et al., 2022; Samory and Mitra, 2018; Uscinski and Parent, 2014; Wood and Douglas, 2013). Most of this research has focused on social media platforms which are deemed a favourable environment for the spread of conspiratorial content (Stano, 2020): not only do the (conspiracy theory-sharing) users cluster together there (Bakshy et al., 2015), but also false information tends to rapidly spread on social media (Vosoughi et al., 2018). Despite the importance of social media-focused research on how conspiracy theories are spread, we suggest that other online information retrieval and curation platforms - such as SEs - can contribute to the proliferation of conspiracy theories online. At the same time, to our knowledge, no systematic analysis of the presence of conspiratorial information in web search results has been conducted yet[2] and we aim to address this gap. [2] One recent study examined the proliferation of conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 in Google’s autocomplete suggestions (Houli et al., 2021), but not search results. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Aleksandra Urman, She is a corresponding author from Department of Informatics, University of Zurich, Switzerland; (2) Mykola Makhortykh, Institute of Communication and Media Studies, University of Bern, Switzerland; (3) Roberto Ulloa, GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Germany; (4) Juhi Kulshrestha, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany. This paper is available on arxiv under CC 4.0 license. Authors: (1) Aleksandra Urman, She is a corresponding author from Department of Informatics, University of Zurich, Switzerland; (2) Mykola Makhortykh, Institute of Communication and Media Studies, University of Bern, Switzerland; (3) Roberto Ulloa, GESIS - Leibniz-Institut für Sozialwissenschaften, Germany; (4) Juhi Kulshrestha, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany. Table of Links Abstract and Introduction Web search results: biases, inaccuracies and their consequences Conspiracy theories in the online environments Research questions Methodology Results Discussion Limitations Conclusion and Bibliography Abstract and Introduction Abstract and Introduction Web search results: biases, inaccuracies and their consequences Web search results: biases, inaccuracies and their consequences Conspiracy theories in the online environments Conspiracy theories in the online environments Research questions Research questions Methodology Methodology Results Results Discussion Discussion Limitations Limitations Conclusion and Bibliography Conclusion and Bibliography Conspiracy theories in the online environments Multiple studies suggest that the rise of online platforms have been conducive to the broader circulation and proliferation of conspiracy theories (Stano, 2020). While this suggestion has been criticized (e.g., by arguing that conspiracy theories can convince only those who already have predispositions to believe in them, Uscinski et al., 2018), even critics agree that the internet amplifies the spread of conspiratorial information and facilitates exposure to it even for individuals who do not hold conspiratorial ideas (Uscinski et al., 2018). While the spread of conspiratorial content by itself is unlikely to make the society as a whole to believe conspiracy theories, it is nevertheless concerning. It can increase belief in conspiracy theories in those parts of the population that have relevant predispositions. The spread of conspiratorial content might not lead to striking increases in the share of people who believe in conspiracy theories (Douglas et al., 2019), but it can have other problematic societal consequences such as decreasing prosocial behaviour and acceptance of science (van der Linden, 2015). Broad circulation and “normalization” of conspiratorial information (Aupers, 2012) in the online environments has prompted increased scholarly interest in the phenomenon (for an overview see Douglas et al., 2019). Over the last decade, a range of studies has explored the way conspiracy theories are spread and discussed online (e.g., Bessi et al., 2015; Harambam, 2021; Lewandowsky et al., 2013; Mahl et al., 2021; Metaxas and Finn, n.d.; Mohammed, 2019; Röchert et al., 2022; Samory and Mitra, 2018; Uscinski and Parent, 2014; Wood and Douglas, 2013). Most of this research has focused on social media platforms which are deemed a favourable environment for the spread of conspiratorial content (Stano, 2020): not only do the (conspiracy theory-sharing) users cluster together there (Bakshy et al., 2015), but also false information tends to rapidly spread on social media (Vosoughi et al., 2018). Despite the importance of social media-focused research on how conspiracy theories are spread, we suggest that other online information retrieval and curation platforms - such as SEs - can contribute to the proliferation of conspiracy theories online. At the same time, to our knowledge, no systematic analysis of the presence of conspiratorial information in web search results has been conducted yet[2] and we aim to address this gap. [2] One recent study examined the proliferation of conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 in Google’s autocomplete suggestions (Houli et al., 2021), but not search results.

A Comparative Algorithm Audit: Conspiracy Theories in the Online Environments

Too Long; Didn't Read

Browserology: Study & Science of Internet Browsers

About Author

TOPICS

THIS ARTICLE WAS FEATURED IN...