No retraction, correction or concern found when last checked on Oct 21, 2026.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy on Social Media: Building a Public Twitter Data Set of Antivaccine Content, Vaccine Misinformation, and Conspiracies

Goran Muric, Yusong Wu, Emilio Ferrara

JMIR Public Health and Surveillance · 2021

Abstract

Background. False claims about COVID-19 vaccines can undermine public trust in ongoing vaccination campaigns, posing a threat to global public health. Misinformation originating from various sources has been spreading on the web since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Antivaccine activists have also begun to use platforms such as Twitter to promote their views. To properly understand the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy through the lens of social media, it is of great importance to gather the relevant data.

Objective. In this paper, we describe a data set of Twitter posts and Twitter accounts that publicly exhibit a strong antivaccine stance. The data set is made available to the research community via our AvaxTweets data set GitHub repository. We characterize the collected accounts in terms of prominent hashtags, shared news sources, and most likely political leaning.

Methods. We started the ongoing data collection on October 18, 2020, leveraging the Twitter streaming application programming interface (API) to follow a set of specific antivaccine-related keywords. Then, we collected the historical tweets of the set of accounts that engaged in spreading antivaccination narratives between October 2020 and December 2020, leveraging the Academic Track Twitter API. The political leaning of the accounts was estimated by measuring the political bias of the media outlets they shared.

Results. We gathered two curated Twitter data collections and made them publicly available: (1) a streaming keyword–centered data collection with more than 1.8 million tweets, and (2) a historical account–level data collection with more than 135 million tweets. The accounts engaged in the antivaccination narratives lean to the right (conservative) direction of the political spectrum. The vaccine hesitancy is fueled by misinformation originating from websites with already questionable credibility.

Conclusions. The vaccine-related misinformation on social media may exacerbate the levels of vaccine hesitancy, hampering progress toward vaccine-induced herd immunity, and could potentially increase the number of infections related to new COVID-19 variants. For these reasons, understanding vaccine hesitancy through the lens of social media is of paramount importance. Because data access is the first obstacle to attain this goal, we published a data set that can be used in studying antivaccine misinformation on social media and enable a better understanding of vaccine hesitancy.

Full text

Its licence does not allow us to show the full text. Read it at PubMed Central:

References 42

1.
Jacobson RM, St Sauver Jennifer L, Finney Rutten LJ. Vaccine hesitancy. Mayo Clin Proc. 2015;90(11):1562-8.
Not in our library10.1016/j.mayocp.2015.09.006
2.
Vaccine hesitancy: a growing challenge for immunization programmes. World Health Organization. 2015.
Not in our library
3.
Butler R, MacDonald NE, SAGE Working Group on Vaccine Hesitancy. Diagnosing the determinants of vaccine hesitancy in specific subgroups: The Guide to Tailoring Immunization Programmes (TIP). Vaccine. 2015;33(34):4176-9.
Not in our library10.1016/j.vaccine.2015.04.038
4.
Quinn S, Jamison A, Freimuth V, An J, Hancock G, Musa D. Exploring racial influences on flu vaccine attitudes and behavior: results of a national survey of White and African American adults. Vaccine. 2017;35(8):1167-1174.
Not in our library10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.12.046
5.
Quinn S, Jamison A, An J, Hancock G, Freimuth V. Measuring vaccine hesitancy, confidence, trust and flu vaccine uptake: results of a national survey of White and African American adults. Vaccine. 2019;37(9):1168-1173.
Not in our library10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.01.033
6.
McKee C, Bohannon K. Exploring the reasons behind parental refusal of vaccines. J Pediatr Pharmacol Ther. 2016;21(2):104-9.
Not in our library10.5863/1551-6776-21.2.104
7.
Burki T. Vaccine misinformation and social media. Lancet Digit Health. 2019;1(6):e258-e259.
Not in our library10.1016/s2589-7500(19)30136-0
8.
Broniatowski D, Jamison A, Qi S, AlKulaib L, Chen T, Benton A, Quinn Sc, Dredze M. Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(10):1378-1384.
Not in our library10.2105/ajph.2018.304567
9.
Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world · 2020
No notice
10.
Johnson N, Velásquez Nicolas, Restrepo N, Leahy R, Gabriel N, El Oud Sara, Zheng Minzhang, Manrique Pedro, Wuchty Stefan, Lupu Yonatan. The online competition between pro- and anti-vaccination views. Nature. 2020;582(7811):230-233.
Not in our library10.1038/s41586-020-2281-1
11.
DeVerna M, Pierri F, Truong B, Bollenbacher J, Axelrod D, Loynes N, Torres-Lugo C, Yang KG, Menczer F, Bryden J. CoVaxxy: a global collection of English-language Twitter posts about COVID-19 vaccines. ArXiv.
Not in our library
12.
Developer agreement and policy 2021. Twitter Developer Platform.
Not in our library
13.
Tracking Social Media Discourse About the COVID-19 Pandemic: Development of a Public Coronavirus Twitter Data Set · 2020
No notice
14.
Lamsal R. Coronavirus (COVID-19) tweets dataset. IEEE Data Port. 2020.
Not in our library10.21227/781w-ef42
15.
Muric G, Wu Y, Ferrara E. AvaxTweets dataset. GitHub.
Not in our library
16.
Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election · 2019
No notice
17.
Badawy A, Lerman K, Ferrara E. Who falls for online political manipulation? Companion Proceedings of The 2019 World Wide Web Conference. 2019;162-168.
Not in our library10.1145/3308560.3316494
18.
Ferrara E, Chang H, Chen E, Muric G, Patel J. Characterizing social media manipulation in the 2020 U.S. presidential election. First Monday. 2020.
Not in our library10.5210/fm.v25i11.11431
19.
AllSides.
Not in our library
20.
Iffy+ mis/disinfo sites. Iffy.
Not in our library
21.
Media Bias/Fact Check.
Not in our library
22.
URL shortener. Bitly.
Not in our library
23.
Yin L, Brown M. SMAPPNYU/urlExpander: initial release 2018. Zenodo.
Not in our library10.5281/zenodo.1345144
24.
Blondel V, Guillaume J, Lambiotte R, Lefebvre E. Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J Stat Mech. 2008;2008(10):P10008.
Not in our library10.1088/1742-5468/2008/10/p10008
25.
The Gateway Pundit.
Not in our library
26.
Breitbart News Network.
Not in our library
27.
The Epoch Times.
Not in our library
28.
Fox News.
Not in our library
29.
New York Post.
Not in our library
30.
Chen E, Deb A, Ferrara E. #Election2020: the first public Twitter dataset on the 2020 US Presidential election. J Comput Soc Sci. 2021;1-18.
Not in our library10.1007/s42001-021-00117-9
31.
Wojcik S, Hughes A. Sizing Up Twitter Users. Pew Research Center. 2019.
Not in our library
32.
How Many People Live in Political Bubbles on Social Media? Evidence From Linked Survey and Twitter Data · 2019
Not checked
33.
COVID-19 and vaccine hesitancy: A longitudinal study · 2021
No notice
34.
Ruiz J, Bell R. Predictors of intention to vaccinate against COVID-19: results of a nationwide survey. Vaccine. 2021;39(7):1080-1086.
Not in our library10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.010
35.
Guntuku S, Sherman G, Stokes D, Agarwal A, Seltzer E, Merchant R. Tracking mental health and symptom mentions on Twitter during COVID-19. J Gen Intern Med. 2020;35:2798-2800.
Not in our library10.1007/s11606-020-05988-8
36.
Elhadad M, Li K, Gebali F. COVID-19-FAKES: a Twitter (Arabic/English) dataset for detecting misleading information on COVID-19. INCoS 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1263. 2021.
Not in our library10.1007/978-3-030-57796-4_25
37.
Gargiulo F, Cafiero F, Guille-Escuret P, Seror V, Ward J. Asymmetric participation of defenders and critics of vaccines to debates on French-speaking Twitter. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):6599.
Not in our library10.1038/s41598-020-62880-5
38.
Shapiro G, Surian D, Dunn A, Perry R, Kelaher M. Comparing human papillomavirus vaccine concerns on Twitter: a cross-sectional study of users in Australia, Canada and the UK. BMJ Open. 2017;7(10):e016869.
Not in our library10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016869
39.
Surian Didi, Nguyen D, Kennedy G, Johnson M, Coiera E, Dunn A. Characterizing Twitter discussions about HPV vaccines using topic modeling and community detection. J Med Internet Res. 2016;18(8):e232.
Not in our library10.2196/jmir.6045
40.
Featherstone J, Barnett G, Ruiz J, Zhuang Y, Millam B. Exploring childhood anti-vaccine and pro-vaccine communities on twitter – a perspective from influential users. Online Soc Netw Media. 2020;20:100105.
Not in our library10.1016/j.osnem.2020.100105

All 42 references

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.