A Computational Study of Misinformation Diffusion and Public Opinion Formation in Online News Networks
Keywords:
misinformation diffusion, public opinion formation, online news networks, computational modeling, algorithmic governance, robustness, fairness, socio-technical infrastructureAbstract
The proliferation of misinformation within online news networks presents a critical challenge to democratic discourse and public trust. This paper presents a computational investigation into the mechanisms by which false or misleading information spreads across digital platforms and shapes collective opinion. We develop an agent-based modeling framework that integrates network topology, cognitive biases, and platform-driven content curation algorithms to simulate the coupled dynamics of information diffusion and opinion formation. The study emphasizes system-level architectural choices and their structural trade-offs, examining how different governance strategies—including content moderation, algorithmic transparency, and user empowerment—affect the robustness and fairness of information ecosystems. Our simulations reveal that homophilic network structures and reinforcement learning in recommender systems amplify echo chambers and accelerate the spread of low-veracity content, while diversity-inducing algorithms can increase resilience but may incur costs in user engagement and personalization accuracy. We further analyze the sustainability of intervention policies under adversarial manipulation and assess the implications for socio-technical infrastructure design. The findings underscore the need for multi-stakeholder governance approaches that balance freedom of expression with collective epistemic welfare, and highlight critical directions for future research in computational social science, human-computer interaction, and public policy.
References
1. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151.
2. Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39–50.
3. Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., ... & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096.
4. Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., ... & Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(3), 554–559.
5. Zollo, F., Bessi, A., Del Vicario, M., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Shekhtman, L., ... & Quattrociocchi, W. (2017). Debunking in a world of tribes. PLOS ONE, 12(7), e0181821.
6. Centola, D. (2010). The spread of behavior in an online social network experiment. Science, 329(5996), 1194–1197.
7. Barabási, A.-L. (2005). Network theory—the emergence of the creative enterprise. Science, 308(5722), 639–641.
8. Watts, D. J., & Dodds, P. S. (2007). Influentials, networks, and public opinion formation. Journal of Consumer Research, 34(4), 441–458.
9. Starnini, M., Frasca, M., & Baronchelli, A. (2021). A high-sensitivity and low-cost method for the detection of coordinated inauthentic behavior in online social networks. Nature Communications, 12, 2598.
10. Bovet, A., & Makse, H. A. (2019). Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Nature Communications, 10, 7.
11. Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B., & Lazer, D. (2019). Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374–378.
12. Solanki, D., Hsu, H. M., Zhao, O., Zhang, R., Bi, W., & Kannan, R. (2020, July). The way we think about ourselves. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 276-285). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
13. Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320.
14. Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132.
15. Schmidt, A., Zollo, F., Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., ... & Quattrociocchi, W. (2017). Anatomy of news consumption on Facebook. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(12), 3034–3039.
16. Shao, C., Ciampaglia, G. L., Varol, O., Yang, K.-C., Flammini, A., & Menczer, F. (2018). The spread of low-credibility content by social bots. Nature Communications, 9, 4787.
17. Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236.
18. Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2019). Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 U.S. election. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 472–480.
19. Ver Steeg, G., & Galstyan, A. (2012). Information transfer in social media. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 509–518). ACM.
20. Castellano, C., Fortunato, S., & Loreto, V. (2009). Statistical physics of social dynamics. Reviews of Modern Physics, 81(2), 591–646.
21. Mocanu, D., Baronchelli, A., Perra, N., Gonçalves, B., Zhang, Q., & Vespignani, A. (2014). The Twitter of Babel: Mapping world languages through microbiogging platforms. PLOS ONE, 9(4), e93430.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal of Advanced Artificial Intelligence Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
