How can we combat online misinformation? A systematic overview of current interventions and their efficacy

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2212.11864v1
• Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2022 16:59:33 GMT
• Title: How can we combat online misinformation? A systematic overview of current interventions and their efficacy
• Authors: Pica Johansson, Florence Enock, Scott Hale, Bertie Vidgen, Cassidy Bereskin, Helen Margetts, Jonathan Bright
• Abstract summary: We develop a new hierarchical framework for understanding interventions against misinformation online. It comprises three key elements: Interventions that Prepare people to be less susceptible; Interventions that Curb the spread and effects of misinformation; and Interventions that Respond to misinformation.
• Score: 4.4628294018254495
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The spread of misinformation is a pressing global problem that has elicited a range of responses from researchers, policymakers, civil society and industry. Over the past decade, these stakeholders have developed many interventions to tackle misinformation that vary across factors such as which effects of misinformation they hope to target, at what stage in the misinformation lifecycle they are aimed at, and who they are implemented by. These interventions also differ in how effective they are at reducing susceptibility to (and curbing the spread of) misinformation. In recent years, a vast amount of scholarly work on misinformation has become available, which extends across multiple disciplines and methodologies. It has become increasingly difficult to comprehensively map all of the available interventions, assess their efficacy, and understand the challenges, opportunities and tradeoffs associated with using them. Few papers have systematically assessed and compared the various interventions, which has led to a lack of understanding in civic and policymaking discourses. With this in mind, we develop a new hierarchical framework for understanding interventions against misinformation online. The framework comprises three key elements: Interventions that Prepare people to be less susceptible; Interventions that Curb the spread and effects of misinformation; and Interventions that Respond to misinformation. We outline how different interventions are thought to work, categorise them, and summarise the available evidence on their efficacy; offering researchers, policymakers and practitioners working to combat online misinformation both an analytical framework that they can use to understand and evaluate different interventions (and which could be extended to address new interventions that we do not describe here) and a summary of the range of interventions that have been proposed to date.

Related papers

• Estimating Causal Effects of Text Interventions Leveraging LLMs [7.2937547395453315]
  This paper proposes a novel approach to estimate causal effects using text transformations facilitated by large language models (LLMs) Unlike existing methods, our approach accommodates arbitrary textual interventions and leverages text-level classifiers with domain adaptation ability to produce robust effect estimates against domain shifts. This flexibility in handling various text interventions is a key advancement in causal estimation for textual data, offering opportunities to better understand human behaviors and develop effective policies within social systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-28T19:19:35Z)
• Intervention strategies for misinformation sharing on social media: A bibliometric analysis [1.8020166013859684]
  Inaccurate shared information causes confusion, can adversely affect mental health, and can lead to mis-informed decision-making. This study explores the typology of intervention strategies for addressing misinformation sharing on social media. It identifies 4 important clusters - cognition-based, automated-based, information-based, and hybrid-based.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-26T08:38:15Z)
• Understanding the Humans Behind Online Misinformation: An Observational Study Through the Lens of the COVID-19 Pandemic [12.873747057824833]
  We conduct a large-scale observational study analyzing over 32 million COVID-19 tweets and 16 million historical timeline tweets. We focus on understanding the behavior and psychology of users disseminating misinformation during COVID-19 and its relationship with the historical inclinations towards sharing misinformation on Non-COVID domains before the pandemic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-12T16:42:53Z)
• False Information, Bots and Malicious Campaigns: Demystifying Elements of Social Media Manipulations [6.901078062583646]
  False information and persistent manipulation attacks on online social networks (OSNs) have affected the openness of OSNs. This paper synthesizes insights from various disciplines to provide a comprehensive analysis of the manipulation landscape.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-08-24T01:37:33Z)
• Zero-shot causal learning [64.9368337542558]
  CaML is a causal meta-learning framework which formulates the personalized prediction of each intervention's effect as a task. We show that CaML is able to predict the personalized effects of novel interventions that do not exist at the time of training.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-28T20:14:11Z)
• Social Influence Dialogue Systems: A Scoping Survey of the Efforts Towards Influence Capabilities of Dialogue Systems [50.57882213439553]
  Social influence dialogue systems are capable of persuasion, negotiation, and therapy. There exists no formal definition or category for dialogue systems with these skills. This study serves as a comprehensive reference for social influence dialogue systems to inspire more dedicated research and discussion in this emerging area.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-10-11T17:57:23Z)
• Adherence to Misinformation on Social Media Through Socio-Cognitive and Group-Based Processes [79.79659145328856]
  We argue that when misinformation proliferates, this happens because the social media environment enables adherence to misinformation. We make the case that polarization and misinformation adherence are closely tied.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-30T12:34:24Z)
• Individual Explanations in Machine Learning Models: A Survey for Practitioners [69.02688684221265]
  The use of sophisticated statistical models that influence decisions in domains of high societal relevance is on the rise. Many governments, institutions, and companies are reluctant to their adoption as their output is often difficult to explain in human-interpretable ways. Recently, the academic literature has proposed a substantial amount of methods for providing interpretable explanations to machine learning models.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-09T01:46:34Z)
• Overcoming Failures of Imagination in AI Infused System Development and Deployment [71.9309995623067]
  NeurIPS 2020 requested that research paper submissions include impact statements on "potential nefarious uses and the consequences of failure" We argue that frameworks of harms must be context-aware and consider a wider range of potential stakeholders, system affordances, as well as viable proxies for assessing harms in the widest sense.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-26T18:09:52Z)
• COVID-19 Misinformation and Disinformation on Social Networks -- The Limits of Veritistic Countermeasures [0.0]
  The COVID-19 pandemic has been the subject of a vast amount of misinformation. Social media platforms recently publicized some of the countermeasures they are adopting. This presents an opportunity to examine the nature of the misinformation and disinformation being produced.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-03T11:25:47Z)
• Mining Disinformation and Fake News: Concepts, Methods, and Recent Advancements [55.33496599723126]
  disinformation including fake news has become a global phenomenon due to its explosive growth. Despite the recent progress in detecting disinformation and fake news, it is still non-trivial due to its complexity, diversity, multi-modality, and costs of fact-checking or annotation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-01-02T21:01:02Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.