Misunderstanding Stance in Tweets
Saved in:
| Title: | Misunderstanding Stance in Tweets |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Rebecca S. Dolgin (ORCID |
| Source: | Discourse Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2025 62(6-7):520-545. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 26 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Social Media, Misconceptions, Attitudes, Telecommunications, Handheld Devices, Comprehension, Age Differences, Gender Differences, Knowledge Level, Predictor Variables, Court Litigation, Political Affiliation |
| DOI: | 10.1080/0163853X.2025.2516982 |
| ISSN: | 0163-853X 1532-6950 |
| Abstract: | How accurately do readers of tweets understand the stance that tweet authors intended to express? We solicited from six authors their intended stance in their May 2022 tweets about "Roe v. Wade" after the Supreme Court's draft opinion to strike down "Roe v. Wade" was disclosed: in support, opposed, no opinion, or something else. We then asked 101 online participants the stance they thought the author intended to express about "Roe v. Wade." Readers' alignment with authors' self-reported stance in each tweet ranged from as low as 33.7% to no higher than 89.1% of readers, and 25% of readers interpreted a stance opposite to the author's intention at least once, despite authors' high confidence that their tweets would be understood as intended. Younger and more liberal readers comprehended more accurately, but their Twitter use, gender, education, and knowledge of "Roe v. Wade" did not significantly predict alignment. In a follow-up study intended to rule out alternative explanations for these findings, 142 online participants also rated the stance they thought the author intended to express on the "Dobbs"' decision, and a highly similar pattern emerged. These findings provide evidence that undetected conceptual misalignment may be an underappreciated factor in social media. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Notes: | https://osf.io/ck9zh |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1502242 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | How accurately do readers of tweets understand the stance that tweet authors intended to express? We solicited from six authors their intended stance in their May 2022 tweets about "Roe v. Wade" after the Supreme Court's draft opinion to strike down "Roe v. Wade" was disclosed: in support, opposed, no opinion, or something else. We then asked 101 online participants the stance they thought the author intended to express about "Roe v. Wade." Readers' alignment with authors' self-reported stance in each tweet ranged from as low as 33.7% to no higher than 89.1% of readers, and 25% of readers interpreted a stance opposite to the author's intention at least once, despite authors' high confidence that their tweets would be understood as intended. Younger and more liberal readers comprehended more accurately, but their Twitter use, gender, education, and knowledge of "Roe v. Wade" did not significantly predict alignment. In a follow-up study intended to rule out alternative explanations for these findings, 142 online participants also rated the stance they thought the author intended to express on the "Dobbs"' decision, and a highly similar pattern emerged. These findings provide evidence that undetected conceptual misalignment may be an underappreciated factor in social media. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0163-853X 1532-6950 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/0163853X.2025.2516982 |
