Project description:Widespread belief in misinformation circulating online is a critical challenge for modern societies. While research to date has focused on psychological and political antecedents to this phenomenon, few studies have explored the role of digital media literacy shortfalls. Using data from preregistered survey experiments conducted around recent elections in the United States and India, we assess the effectiveness of an intervention modeled closely on the world's largest media literacy campaign, which provided "tips" on how to spot false news to people in 14 countries. Our results indicate that exposure to this intervention reduced the perceived accuracy of both mainstream and false news headlines, but effects on the latter were significantly larger. As a result, the intervention improved discernment between mainstream and false news headlines among both a nationally representative sample in the United States (by 26.5%) and a highly educated online sample in India (by 17.5%). This increase in discernment remained measurable several weeks later in the United States (but not in India). However, we find no effects among a representative sample of respondents in a largely rural area of northern India, where rates of social media use are far lower.
Project description:Trust in the news media received wide scholarly attention for almost a century, which was further boosted as a result of recent developments in the media landscape and changes in how news is made and consumed. Despite that, the conceptualization of trust in the news media is still debated, and its measurement comparability has not yet been established. In this paper, I build up on earlier conceptualizations of trust in the news media, and test three theoretically derived measurement models to determine their cross-cultural equivalence in 28 EU countries. Using Eurobarometer data, I test the validity and comparability of these measurements employing multi-group confirmatory factor analysis. The findings indicate that trust is a unidimensional latent construct, equally interpreted across contexts. People's level of trust in the news media reflects their general attitude to the news stories and reporters in all sources of media they are exposed to. While bifactorial measurements of news media trust, differentiating between legacy and online sources, have some merit in single case-studies, they are non-invariant and therefore non comparable. This means that any cross-population differences found employing them are likely a function of measurement idiosyncrasies or other unknown factors.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43545-022-00534-1.
Project description:To investigate how people assess whether politically consistent news is real or fake, two studies (N = 1,008; N = 1,397) with adult American participants conducted in 2020 and 2022 utilized a within-subjects experimental design to investigate perceptions of news accuracy. When a mock Facebook post with either fake (Study 1) or real (Study 2) news content was attributed to an alternative (vs. a mainstream) news outlet, it was, on average, perceived to be less accurate. Those with beliefs reflecting News Media Literacy demonstrated greater sensitivity to the outlet's status. This relationship was itself contingent on the strength of the participant's partisan identity. Strong partisans high in News Media Literacy defended the accuracy of politically consistent content, even while recognizing that an outlet was unfamiliar. These results highlight the fundamental importance of looking at the interaction between user-traits and features of social media news posts when examining learning from political news on social media.
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic was a devastating public health event that spurred an influx of misinformation. The increase in questionable health content was aided by the speed and scale of digital and social media and certain news agencies' and politicians' active dissemination of misinformation about the virus. The popularity of certain COVID-19 myths created confusion about effective health protocols and impacted trust in the health care and government sectors deployed to manage the pandemic.ObjectiveThis study explored how people's information habits, their level of institutional trust, the news media outlets they consume and the technologies in which they access it, and their media literacy skills influenced their COVID-19 knowledge.MethodsWe administered a web-based survey using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) to assess US adults' (n=1498) COVID-19 knowledge, media and news habits, media literacy skills, and trust in government and health-related institutions. The data were analyzed using a hierarchical linear regression to examine the association between trust, media literacy, news use, and COVID-19 knowledge.ResultsThe regression model of demographic variables, political affiliation, trust in institutions, media literacy, and the preference for watching Fox or CNN was statistically significant (R2=0.464; F24,1434=51.653; P<.001; adjusted R2=0.455) in predicting COVID-19 knowledge scores. People who identified as politically conservative, watched Fox News, and reported lower levels of institutional trust and media literacy, scored lower on COVID-19 knowledge questions than those who identified as politically liberal, did not watch Fox News and reported higher levels of institutional trust and media literacy.ConclusionsThis study suggests that the media outlets people turn to, their trust in institutions, and their perceived degree of agency to discern credible information can impact people's knowledge of COVID-19, which has potential implications for managing communication in other public health events.
Project description:The spread of online fake news is emerging as a major threat to human society and democracy. Previous studies have investigated media truth discernment among adults but not among adolescents. Adolescents might face a greater risk of believing fake news, particularly fake news that is shared via social media, because of their vulnerabilities in terms of reasoning. In the present study, we investigated (1) the development of media truth discernment and the illusory truth effect from adolescence to adulthood and (2) whether the development of media truth discernment and the illusory truth effect are related to the development of reasoning ability. To accomplish this task, we recruited 432 adolescents aged 11 to 14 years as well as 132 adults. Participants were asked to rate the perceived accuracy of both real and fake news headlines. Participants were exposed to half of the news items before entering the rating phase. Finally, participants completed the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT). Media truth discernment (i.e., the difference between participants' ratings of fake and real news) developed linearly with increasing age, and participants rated familiarized headlines as more accurate than novel headlines at all ages (i.e., the illusory truth effect). Finally, media truth development (but not the illusory truth effect) was related to the development of reasoning abilities with increasing age. Our findings highlight the urgent need to improve logical thinking among adolescents to help them detect fake news online.
Project description:Older adults are especially susceptible to fake news online, possibly because they are less digitally literate compared to younger individuals. Interventions for older adults have emerged to improve digital literacy, although there has been little evaluation of their effectiveness in improving older adults' resilience to fake news. We report the results of a digital literacy intervention for older adults administered during the 2020 U.S. election. The intervention was a 1-hour, self-directed series of interactive modules designed to teach concepts and skills for identifying misinformation online. Consistent with our pre-registered hypothesis, older adults (Mage = 67) in the treatment condition (N = 143) significantly improved their likelihood of accurately discerning fake from true news from 64% pre-intervention to 85% post-intervention. In contrast, older adults in the control condition (N = 238) did not significantly improve (from 55% to 57%). The treated older adults were also more likely to employ strategies for identifying misinformation online compared to pre-intervention and the control group.
Project description:IntroductionMisinformation surrounding COVID-19 poses a global public health problem that adversely affects governments' abilities to mitigate the disease and causes accidental deaths and self-harm due to false beliefs about the virus, prevention measures, vaccines and cures. We aim to examine the relationship between exposure to and trust in COVID-19 news (from Television, social media, interpersonal communication) and information sources (healthcare experts, government, clerics) and belief in COVID-19 myths and false information, as well as critical verification practices before posting on social media.MethodsWe use a cross-sectional researcher-administered phone survey of adults living in Lebanon between March 27 and April 23, 2020.ResultsThe sample included 56.1% men and 43.9% women, 37.9% with a university degree, 63.0% older than 30, and 7% with media literacy training. Those who trust COVID-19 news from social media [95%CI:(1.05-1.52)] and interpersonal communication [95%CI:(1.25-1.82)], and those who trust information from clerics [95%CI:(1.25-1.82)] were more likely to believe in COVID-19 myths and false information. University graduates [95%CI:(0.25-0.51)] and those who trust information from government [95%CI:(0.65-0.89] were less likely to believe in myths and false information. Those who believe in COVID-19 myths and false information [95%CI:(0.25-0.70)] were less likely to engage in critical social media posting practices. Only those who underwent media literacy training [95%CI:(1.24-6.55)] were more likely to engage in critical social media posting practices.ConclusionHigher education and trust in information from government contributed to decreasing belief in COVID-19 myths and false information. Trust in news from social media, interpersonal communication and clerics contributed to increasing belief in COVID-19 myths and false information, which in turn contributed to less critical social media posting practices, thereby exacerbated the infodemic. Media literacy training contributed to increasing critical social media posting practices, thereby played a role in mitigating the infodemic.
Project description:There is widespread concern about misinformation circulating on social media. In particular, many argue that the context of social media itself may make people susceptible to the influence of false claims. Here, we test that claim by asking whether simply considering sharing news on social media reduces the extent to which people discriminate truth from falsehood when judging accuracy. In a large online experiment examining coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and political news (N = 3157 Americans), we find support for this possibility. When judging the accuracy of headlines, participants were worse at discerning truth from falsehood if they both evaluated accuracy and indicated their sharing intentions, compared to just evaluating accuracy. These results suggest that people may be particularly vulnerable to believing false claims on social media, given that sharing is a core element of what makes social media "social."
Project description:Interest in the psychology of misinformation has exploded in recent years. Despite ample research, to date there is no validated framework to measure misinformation susceptibility. Therefore, we introduce Verification done, a nuanced interpretation schema and assessment tool that simultaneously considers Veracity discernment, and its distinct, measurable abilities (real/fake news detection), and biases (distrust/naïvité-negative/positive judgment bias). We then conduct three studies with seven independent samples (Ntotal = 8504) to show how to develop, validate, and apply the Misinformation Susceptibility Test (MIST). In Study 1 (N = 409) we use a neural network language model to generate items, and use three psychometric methods-factor analysis, item response theory, and exploratory graph analysis-to create the MIST-20 (20 items; completion time < 2 minutes), the MIST-16 (16 items; < 2 minutes), and the MIST-8 (8 items; < 1 minute). In Study 2 (N = 7674) we confirm the internal and predictive validity of the MIST in five national quota samples (US, UK), across 2 years, from three different sampling platforms-Respondi, CloudResearch, and Prolific. We also explore the MIST's nomological net and generate age-, region-, and country-specific norm tables. In Study 3 (N = 421) we demonstrate how the MIST-in conjunction with Verification done-can provide novel insights on existing psychological interventions, thereby advancing theory development. Finally, we outline the versatile implementations of the MIST as a screening tool, covariate, and intervention evaluation framework. As all methods are transparently reported and detailed, this work will allow other researchers to create similar scales or adapt them for any population of interest.