Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Oct;108(10):1378-1384.
doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2018.304567. Epub 2018 Aug 23.

Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate

David A Broniatowski  1 , Amelia M Jamison  1 , SiHua Qi  1 , Lulwah AlKulaib  1 , Tao Chen  1 , Adrian Benton  1 , Sandra C Quinn  1 , Mark Dredze  1
Affiliations

Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate

David A Broniatowski et al. Am J Public Health. 2018 Oct.

Abstract

Objectives: To understand how Twitter bots and trolls ("bots") promote online health content.

Methods: We compared bots' to average users' rates of vaccine-relevant messages, which we collected online from July 2014 through September 2017. We estimated the likelihood that users were bots, comparing proportions of polarized and antivaccine tweets across user types. We conducted a content analysis of a Twitter hashtag associated with Russian troll activity.

Results: Compared with average users, Russian trolls (χ2(1) = 102.0; P < .001), sophisticated bots (χ2(1) = 28.6; P < .001), and "content polluters" (χ2(1) = 7.0; P < .001) tweeted about vaccination at higher rates. Whereas content polluters posted more antivaccine content (χ2(1) = 11.18; P < .001), Russian trolls amplified both sides. Unidentifiable accounts were more polarized (χ2(1) = 12.1; P < .001) and antivaccine (χ2(1) = 35.9; P < .001). Analysis of the Russian troll hashtag showed that its messages were more political and divisive.

Conclusions: Whereas bots that spread malware and unsolicited content disseminated antivaccine messages, Russian trolls promoted discord. Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination. Public Health Implications. Directly confronting vaccine skeptics enables bots to legitimize the vaccine debate. More research is needed to determine how best to combat bot-driven content.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

FIGURE 1—
FIGURE 1—
Bots’ Likelihood of Tweeting About Vaccines Compared With Average Twitter Users: July 14, 2014–September 26, 2017 Note. NBC = National Broadcasting Network. All results remained significant after controlling for multiple comparisons using the Holm–Bonferroni procedure. Raw counts are given in Table B (available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). *P < .05; **P < .01; ***P < .001.
FIGURE 2—
FIGURE 2—
Number of Tweets per Unique Account, Separated by Sentiment and Bot Score Category: July 14, 2014–September 26, 2017 aNot significant after controlling for multiple comparisons using the Holm–Bonferroni procedure. Raw counts are given in Table D (available as a supplement to the online version of this article at http://www.ajph.org). **P < .01; ***P < .001.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Kata A. Anti-vaccine activists, Web 2.0, and the postmodern paradigm—an overview of tactics and tropes used online by the anti-vaccination movement. Vaccine. 2012;30(25):3778–3789. - PubMed
    1. Breland JY, Quintiliani LM, Schneider KL, May CN, Pagoto S. Social media as a tool to increase the impact of public health research. Am J Public Health. 2017;107(12):1890–1891. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Luxton DD, June JD, Fairall JM. Social media and suicide: a public health perspective. Am J Public Health. 2012;102(suppl 2):S195–S200. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Witteman HO, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. The defining characteristics of Web 2.0 and their potential influence in the online vaccination debate. Vaccine. 2012;30(25):3734–3740. - PubMed
    1. Quinn SC. Probing beyond individual factors to understand influenza and pneumococcal vaccine uptake. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(4):427–429. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources