Facebook permitted researchers to alter data feeds without users' permission

the verdict

SUPPORTED

the evidence backs this

Recorded sources

2 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Multiple news reports and a published academic study confirm that Facebook permitted researchers to manipulate the news feeds of hundreds of thousands of users without their explicit knowledge or consent.

How claims like this are judged

Judged against reference works: claims of this kind are settled by the historical reference record, not journal abstracts.

Evidence for · 2

skeptics.stackexchange.com: Did Facebook permit researchers to alter data feeds without users ...

Recorded source metadata

skeptics.stackexchange.com: Did Facebook permit researchers to alter data feeds without users .... skeptics.stackexchange.com. https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/22160/did-facebook-permit-researchers-to-alter-data-feeds-without-users-permission

Confirms Facebook allowed scientists to conduct a psychological experiment by tweaking user news feeds.

Source citation format

See more details

More for · 1

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov: Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks

Recorded source metadata

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov: Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4066473/

The PNAS paper by Facebook researchers documents the massive-scale emotional contagion experiment via News Feeds.

Source citation format

The paper trail · every fact has a biography

first checked01 Aug 2026

judged → SUPPORTED · 7501 Aug 2026

More receipts

Is it true that Phonological evolution involves regular processes of phoneme elision, vowel nasalization, and tonogenesis?Is it true that Hemangiomas are treatable with medication?Is it true that Research identifies forms of intelligence that diverge from standard IQ measures?

Random receipt →The Trust Wiki →

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.

Check your own claim

Challenge the receipt

I have a source that contradicts this verdict I have a source that supports it No source: request a receipt review Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

trust me, bro: win the argument, pass the class, survive peer review.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work · Dispute this receipt