Significantly, the research study likewise discovered that exposure to the Russian influence campaign on Twitter was substantially eclipsed by content from domestic news media and political leaders. On average, the research studys respondents were exposed to roughly four posts from Russian foreign influence accounts per day in October of 2016. The research study evaluated a three-wave longitudinal study of almost 1,500 U.S. respondents carried out by YouGov. The respondents, who consented both to supply their Twitter account information for research study purposes and to answer concerns worrying their political attitudes and beliefs at numerous points during the 2016 U.S. election project, were surveyed in April 2016 and October 2016 as well as quickly after the election– to indicate whether they voted and, if so, for whom.
A new research study by NYUs Center for Social Media and Politics reveals that Russian Twitter projects during the 2016 presidential race mostly reached a small group of extremely partisan Republicans.
Exposure to Russian Twitter projects in 2016 presidential race was extremely concentrated, mostly limited to strongly partisan Republicans.
New research study shows online push by foreign disinformation accounts didnt alter attitudes or voting habits– but disinformation effort may still have had effects.
Russian Twitter campaigns throughout the 2016 governmental race mainly reached a small subset of users, many of whom were highly partisan Republicans, reveals a brand-new research study by NYUs Center for Social Media and Politics. In addition, the international research study group found that in spite of Russias impact operations on the platform, there were no measurable changes in mindsets, polarization, or voting habits amongst those exposed to this foreign impact campaign.
Previous research study and government examinations have actually concluded that Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. election was developed to affect the ballot habits of Americans in favor of GOP candidate Donald Trump, either by shifting support toward Trump himself or by motivating disaffected liberals– typically Bernie Sanders voters– to vote for a third-party candidate or to avoid voting entirely.
” Despite this massive effort to influence the presidential race on social networks and an extensive belief that this disturbance had an influence on the 2016 U.S. elections, potential direct exposure to tweets from Russian giants that cycle was, in fact, greatly concentrated among a little portion of the American electorate– and this part was most likely to be extremely partisan Republicans,” discusses Professor Joshua A. Tucker, co-director of the Center for Social Media and Politics (CSMaP) and one of the authors of the paper, which appears in the journal Nature Communications.
Prospective exposure to Russian coordinated influence accounts, by the Internet Research Agency, an organization closely linked to the Russian government, was greatly focused: only 1% of users in the study accounted for 70% of direct exposures. In addition, those who determined as “Strong Republicans” were exposed to roughly nine times as numerous posts from Russian foreign impact accounts than were those who determined as Democrats or Independents.
The study, that included scientists from the University of Copenhagen, Trinity College Dublin, and Technical University of Munich and examined social media users habits and mindsets in both April and October of 2016, likewise concluded that there was no relationship in between direct exposure to the Russian foreign influence project and modifications in attitudes, polarization, or voting behavior.
In spite of these outcomes, the scientists caution that Russia attempts to alter the outcome of the election may have had other effects.
” It would be an error to conclude that just since the Russian foreign impact project on Twitter was not meaningfully associated to individual-level attitudes that other elements of the project did not have any influence on the election, or on faith in American electoral integrity,” says the University of Copenhagens Gregory Eady, one of the studys co-lead authors.
” Debate about the 2016 U.S. election continues to raise questions about the legitimacy of the Trump presidency and to stimulate mistrust in the electoral system, which in turn may be associated with Americans willingness to accept claims of citizen scams in the 2020 election and future elections,” includes Trinity College Dublins Tom Paskhalis, the other co-lead author of the research study.
Especially, the study likewise discovered that direct exposure to the Russian influence project on Twitter was substantially eclipsed by material from domestic news media and politicians. Typically, the research studys participants were exposed to roughly 4 posts from Russian foreign impact accounts per day in October of 2016. However, over the very same duration, they were exposed to approximately 106 posts on typical per day from nationwide news media and 35 posts each day from U.S. political leaders.
” In other words, online users saw 25 times more posts from nationwide news media and 9 times as many posts from political leaders than those from Russian foreign influence accounts,” observes Technical University of Munichs Jan Zilinsky, among the research studys authors, “to say nothing of what they may have discovered about the election from other media, such as television or online news.”
The papers other authors were Jonathan Nagler, a teacher in NYUs Department of Politics, and Richard Bonneau, a professor in NYUs Department of Biology and Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences. Tucker, likewise director of NYUs Jordan Center for the Advanced Study of Russia, and Nagler are co-directors of CSMaP.
The research study examined a three-wave longitudinal study of nearly 1,500 U.S. respondents conducted by YouGov. The respondents, who consented both to provide their Twitter account info for research purposes and to respond to concerns worrying their political mindsets and beliefs at several points during the 2016 U.S. election campaign, were surveyed in April 2016 and October 2016 along with shortly after the election– to suggest whether they voted and, if so, for whom. The structure of the respondents was around representative of the market profile of the U.S. voting-age public.
Recommendation: “Exposure to the Russian Internet Research Agency foreign impact campaign on Twitter in the 2016 United States election and its relationship to attitudes and voting habits” by Gregory Eady, Tom Paskhalis, Jan Zilinsky, Richard Bonneau, Jonathan Nagler and Joshua A. Tucker, 9 January 2023, Nature Communications.DOI: 10.1038/ s41467-022-35576-9.
The Center for Social Media and Politics at New York University is supported, in part, by funding from the National Science Foundation (# 1756657).
