Did the Roll-Out of Community Notes Reduce Engagement With Misinformation on X/Twitter?

Developing interventions that successfully reduce engagement with misinformation on social media is challenging. One intervention that has recently gained great attention is X/Twitter's Community Notes (previously known as "Birdwatch"). Community Notes is a crowdsourced fact-checking approach that allows users to write textual notes to inform others about potentially misleading posts on X/Twitter. Yet, empirical evidence regarding its effectiveness in reducing engagement with misinformation on social media is missing. In this paper, we perform a large-scale empirical study to analyze whether the introduction of the Community Notes feature and its roll-out to users in the U.S. and around the world have reduced engagement with misinformation on X/Twitter in terms of retweet volume and likes. We employ Difference-in-Differences (DiD) models and Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) to analyze a comprehensive dataset consisting of all fact-checking notes and corresponding source tweets since the launch of Community Notes in early 2021. Although we observe a significant increase in the volume of fact-checks carried out via Community Notes, particularly for tweets from verified users with many followers, we find no evidence that the introduction of Community Notes significantly reduced engagement with misleading tweets on X/Twitter. Rather, our findings suggest that Community Notes might be too slow to effectively reduce engagement with misinformation in the early (and most viral) stage of diffusion. Our work emphasizes the importance of evaluating fact-checking interventions in the field and offers important implications to enhance crowdsourced fact-checking strategies on social media.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2024-11-07
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3686967
Citations
34
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
38.49

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Did the Roll-Out of Community Notes Reduce Engagement With Misinformation on X/Twitter?

Yuwei Chuai, Nicolas Pröllochs, Gabriele Lenzini, Haoye Tian
34 citations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Misinformation and Its Impacts
38.49
article

Did the Roll-Out of Community Notes Reduce Engagement With Misinformation on X/Twitter?

Yuwei Chuai, Nicolas Pröllochs, Gabriele Lenzini, Haoye Tian
article en
34 citations

Abstract

Developing interventions that successfully reduce engagement with misinformation on social media is challenging. One intervention that has recently gained great attention is X/Twitter's Community Notes (previously known as "Birdwatch"). Community Notes is a crowdsourced fact-checking approach that allows users to write textual notes to inform others about potentially misleading posts on X/Twitter. Yet, empirical evidence regarding its effectiveness in reducing engagement with misinformation on social media is missing. In this paper, we perform a large-scale empirical study to analyze whether the introduction of the Community Notes feature and its roll-out to users in the U.S. and around the world have reduced engagement with misinformation on X/Twitter in terms of retweet volume and likes. We employ Difference-in-Differences (DiD) models and Regression Discontinuity Design (RDD) to analyze a comprehensive dataset consisting of all fact-checking notes and corresponding source tweets since the launch of Community Notes in early 2021. Although we observe a significant increase in the volume of fact-checks carried out via Community Notes, particularly for tweets from verified users with many followers, we find no evidence that the introduction of Community Notes significantly reduced engagement with misleading tweets on X/Twitter. Rather, our findings suggest that Community Notes might be too slow to effectively reduce engagement with misinformation in the early (and most viral) stage of diffusion. Our work emphasizes the importance of evaluating fact-checking interventions in the field and offers important implications to enhance crowdsourced fact-checking strategies on social media.

Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer InteractionVol. 8(CSCW2)
The University of Melbourne (AU), University of Luxembourg (LU)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Openalex Percentile: Top 0%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
38.49
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.