MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293772762 · doi:10.5509/2022953549

Mobilized and Polarized: Social Media and Disinformation Narratives in the 2022 Philippine Elections

2022· article· en· W4293772762 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aries A. Arugay, Justin Keith A. Baquisal

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisinformationSocial mediaDemocracyAuthoritarianismPolitical sciencePolarization (electrochemistry)NarrativePoliticsPolitical economyVotingIncentiveMedia studiesSociologyEconomicsLawMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social media played a significant role in the 2022 Philippine national elections. Using various empirical sources, including an original pre-electoral survey, we argue that social media was critical in the production, transmission, and reception of election-related information and narratives that resulted in o ine and online polarization and mobilization of Filipino voters in the 2022 elections. This article discusses the role of social media in electoral politics in the Philippines relative to other factors, such as material incentives for political partisans, prior voting behavior patterns, information consumption, and long-standing grievances. We discuss how these factors inform social media's role in mobilizing and polarizing the Philippine electorate. We also unpack the leading disinformation narratives of authoritarian nostalgia, conspiracy theory, strongman leadership, and democratic disillusionment, which fueled support for Marcos Jr. and undermined the other candidates. In conclusion, this article discusses the implications of disinformation in the 2022 elections for the post-electoral political engagement of Filipinos and its contribution to the further political dysfunction of Philippine democracy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.272
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific AffairsSame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207