skip to main content
10.1145/3341161.3342927acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageskddConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper
Public Access

The role of user profiles for fake news detection

Published:15 January 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

Consuming news from social media is becoming increasingly popular. Social media appeals to users due to its fast dissemination of information, low cost, and easy access. However, social media also enables the widespread of fake news. Due to the detrimental societal effects of fake news, detecting fake news has attracted increasing attention. However, the detection performance only using news contents is generally not satisfactory as fake news is written to mimic true news. Thus, there is a need for an in-depth understanding on the relationship between user profiles on social media and fake news. In this paper, we study the problem of understanding and exploiting user profiles on social media for fake news detection. In an attempt to understand connections between user profiles and fake news, first, we measure users' sharing behaviors and group representative users who are more likely to share fake and real news; then, we perform a comparative analysis of explicit and implicit profile features between these user groups, which reveals their potential to help differentiate fake news from real news. To exploit user profile features, we demonstrate the usefulness of these user profile features in a fake news classification task. We further validate the effectiveness of these features through feature importance analysis. The findings of this work lay the foundation for deeper exploration of user profile features of social media and enhance the capabilities for fake news detection.

References

  1. K. Shu, A. Sliva, S. Wang, J. Tang, and H. Liu, "Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective," KDD exploration newsletter, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. X. Zhou and R. Zafarani, "Fake news: A survey of research, detection methods, and opportunities," arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.00315, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C. Castillo, M. Mendoza, and B. Poblete, "Information credibility on twitter," in Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web. ACM, 2011, pp. 675--684.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. K. Shu, D. Mahudeswaran, S. Wang, D. Lee, and H. Liu, "Fakenewsnet: A data repository with news content, social context and dynamic information for studying fake news on social media," arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.01286, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. C. A. Davis, O. Varol, E. Ferrara, A. Flammini, and F. Menczer, "Botornot: A system to evaluate social bots," in WWW, 2016, pp. 273--274.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. K. Shu, S. Wang, and H. Liu, "Understanding user profiles on social media for fake news detection," in MIPR. IEEE, 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. A. Rahimi, T. Cohn, and T. Baldwin, "pigeo: A python geotagging tool," Proceedings of ACL-2016 System Demonstrations, pp. 127--132, 2016.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. K. Sohn, H. Lee, and X. Yan, "Learning structured output representation using deep conditional generative models," in Advances in neural information processing systems, 2015, pp. 3483--3491.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. M. Gentzkow, J. M. Shapiro, and D. F. Stone, "Media bias in the marketplace: Theory," National Bureau of Economic Research, Tech. Rep., 2014.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. J. Kulshrestha, M. Eslami, J. Messias, M. B. Zafar, S. Ghosh, K. P. Gummadi, and K. Karahalios, "Quantifying search bias: Investigating sources of bias for political searches in social media," in CSCW'17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Y. Ji and J. Eisenstein, "Representation learning for text-level discourse parsing," in ACL'2014, vol. 1, 2014, pp. 13--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. J. W. Pennebaker, R. L. Boyd, K. Jordan, and K. Blackburn, "The development and psychometric properties of liwc2015," Tech. Rep., 2015.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. N. Cantor and J. F. Kihlstrom, Personality, cognition and social interaction. Routledge, 2017, vol. 5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. M. Potthast, J. Kiesel, K. Reinartz, J. Bevendorff, and B. Stein, "A stylometric inquiry into hyperpartisan and fake news," arXiv preprint arXiv:1702.05638, 2017.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. A. Gupta, H. Lamba, P. Kumaraguru, and A. Joshi, "Faking sandy: characterizing and identifying fake images on twitter during hurricane sandy," in WWW'13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Z. Jin, J. Cao, Y. Zhang, and J. Luo, "News verification by exploiting conflicting social viewpoints in microblogs." in AAAI, 2016, pp. 2972--2978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. H. A. Schwartz, J. C. Eichstaedt, M. L. Kern, L. Dziurzynski, S. M. Ramones, M. Agrawal, A. Shah, M. Kosinski, D. Stillwell, M. E. Seligman et al., "Personality, gender, and age in the language of social media: The open-vocabulary approach," PloS one, vol. 8, no. 9, p. e73791, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  1. The role of user profiles for fake news detection

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      ASONAM '19: Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining
      August 2019
      1228 pages
      ISBN:9781450368681
      DOI:10.1145/3341161

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 15 January 2020

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper

      Acceptance Rates

      ASONAM '19 Paper Acceptance Rate41of286submissions,14%Overall Acceptance Rate116of549submissions,21%

      Upcoming Conference

      KDD '24

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader