Social Bots' Role in the COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion on Twitter.

Social bots have already infiltrated social media platforms, such as Twitter, Facebook, and so on. Exploring the role of social bots in discussions of the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as comparing the behavioral differences between social bots and humans, is an important foundation for studying public health opinion dissemination. We collected data on Twitter and used Botometer to classify users into social bots and humans. Machine learning methods were used to analyze the characteristics of topic semantics, sentiment attributes, dissemination intentions, and interaction patterns of humans and social bots. The results show that 22% of these accounts were social bots, while 78% were humans, and there are significant differences in the behavioral characteristics between them. Social bots are more concerned with the topics of public health news than humans are with individual health and daily lives. More than 85% of bots' tweets are liked, and they have a large number of followers and friends, which means they have influence on internet users' perceptions about disease transmission and public health. In addition, social bots, located mainly in Europe and America countries, create an "authoritative" image by posting a lot of news, which in turn gains more attention and has a significant effect on humans. The findings contribute to understanding the behavioral patterns of new technologies such as social bots and their role in the dissemination of public health information.

Multiple Concurrent Causal Relationships and Multiple Governance Pathways for Non-Pharmaceutical Intervention Policies in Pandemics: A Fuzzy Set Qualitative Comparative Analysis Based on 102 Countries and Regions.

The global outbreak of COVID-19 has been wreaking havoc on all aspects of human societies. In addition to pharmaceutical interventions, non-pharmaceutical intervention policies have been proven to be crucial in slowing down the spread of the virus and reducing the impact of the outbreak on economic development, daily life, and social stability. However, no studies have focused on which non-pharmaceutical intervention policies are more effective; this is the focus of our study. We used data samples from 102 countries and regions around the world and selected seven categories of related policies, including work and school suspensions, assembly restrictions, movement restrictions, home isolation, international population movement restrictions, income subsidies, and testing and screening as the condition variables. A susceptible-exposed-infected-quarantined-recovered (SEIQR) model considering non-pharmaceutical intervention policies and latency with infectiousness was constructed to calculate the epidemic transmission rate as the outcome variable, and a fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) method was applied to explore the multiple concurrent causal relationships and multiple governance paths of non-pharmaceutical intervention policies for epidemics from the configuration perspective. We found a total of four non-pharmaceutical intervention policy pathways. Among them, L1 was highly suppressive, L2 was moderately suppressive, and L3 was externally suppressive. The results also showed that individual non-pharmaceutical intervention policy could not effectively suppress the spread of the pandemic. Moreover, three specific non-pharmaceutical intervention policies, including work stoppage and school closure, testing and screening, and economic subsidies, had a universal effect in the policies grouping for effective control of the pandemic transmission.