SwePub
Sök i LIBRIS databas

  Extended search

onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:hb-29022"
 

Search: onr:"swepub:oai:DiVA.org:hb-29022" > Facts and arguments...

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist
  • Foderaro, Antonella (author)

Facts and arguments checking: investigating the occurrence of scientific arguments on Twitter

  • Article/chapterEnglish2022

Publisher, publication year, extent ...

  • 2022-10-25
  • Borås :Högskolan i Borås,2022
  • printrdacarrier

Numbers

  • LIBRIS-ID:oai:DiVA.org:hb-29022
  • https://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:hb:diva-29022URI
  • https://doi.org/10.47989/colis2230DOI

Supplementary language notes

  • Language:English
  • Summary in:English

Part of subdatabase

Classification

  • Subject category:ref swepub-contenttype
  • Subject category:kon swepub-publicationtype

Notes

  • Introduction. A method for studying use of scientific sources in arguments on Twitter is demonstrated.Method. Data were collected from the Twitter API v. 2.0 using Focalevents, searching for tweets with links to DOIs, and then collecting conversations around these tweets. Analysis. Three conversations on different topics were analysed searching for argumentative behaviour, use of scientific sources, their reliability, consistency and adequacy in relation to the argument and the target audience. Both quantitative and qualitative content analysis based on argumentation theory were applied.Results. The method allowed us to identify scientific publications used argumentatively by a multiple audience in the context of Twitter conversations. The publications were used to build scientific arguments, mainly, but not exclusively, from individual and collegial expert opinion. Scientific findings were often misinterpreted and used improperly to the benefit of the argument.Conclusions. Through the use of argumentation theory to study conversations in a structured way, the paper demonstrates how to approach the usage of scientific publications in arguments. Scientific publications were used to build scientific arguments from different types of expert opinion, for giving proofs for claims and counter-arguments, and inconsistent or biased arguments from individual expert opinion.

Subject headings and genre

Added entries (persons, corporate bodies, meetings, titles ...)

  • Gunnarsson Lorentzen, David,Dr,1981-Högskolan i Borås,Akademin för bibliotek, information, pedagogik och IT(Swepub:hb)dgu (author)
  • Högskolan i BoråsAkademin för bibliotek, information, pedagogik och IT (creator_code:org_t)

Related titles

  • In:Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Conceptions of Library and Information Science, Oslo Metropolitan University, May 29 - June 1, 2022Borås : Högskolan i Borås
  • In:Information Research: an international electronic journalBorås : Högskolan i Borås1368-1613

Internet link

Find in a library

To the university's database

  • 1 of 1
  • Previous record
  • Next record
  •    To hitlist

Find more in SwePub

By the author/editor
Foderaro, Antone ...
Gunnarsson Loren ...
About the subject
SOCIAL SCIENCES
SOCIAL SCIENCES
and Media and Commun ...
and Information Stud ...
Articles in the publication
Information Rese ...
By the university
University of Borås

Search outside SwePub

Kungliga biblioteket hanterar dina personuppgifter i enlighet med EU:s dataskyddsförordning (2018), GDPR. Läs mer om hur det funkar här.
Så här hanterar KB dina uppgifter vid användning av denna tjänst.

 
pil uppåt Close

Copy and save the link in order to return to this view