OK, then give me some other hypothesis that's *actually testable* and that someone (you or me or a smart graduate student out there) could *actually test* (i.e.. the data is available publicly) in a reasonable length of time.
-
-
If I had to make a prediction, just the non-voter effect would be within election swinging range. BUT YES IT WAS SUPER CLOSE so there are many things within that range. Still, this is one. Narrative shift is harder to measure as direct voting impact, but would be good to see.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
OK, then I'd say that the Russian shitposts are not enough to have changed the outcome (which would have required a net shift of ~0.8 percentage points toward Clinton). I'd also consider that to be a pretty *large* effect, as these things go.
-
Brendan and I disagree on how applicable it is but I especially like the follow-up to the Nature paper. This is an impressive example of what you can do with a well-designed study and Facebook data. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173851 …
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s almost certainly easier to suppress turnout than to encourage it too
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.