"I don't trust them": Exploring Perceptions of Fact-checking Entities for Flagging Online Misinformation

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.00866v1
• Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 17:01:09 GMT
• Title: "I don't trust them": Exploring Perceptions of Fact-checking Entities for Flagging Online Misinformation
• Authors: Hana Habib, Sara Elsharawy, Rifat Rahman,
• Abstract summary: We conducted an online study with 655 US participants to explore user perceptions of eight categories of fact-checking entities across two misinformation topics. Our results hint at the need for further exploring fact-checking entities that may be perceived as neutral, as well as the potential for incorporating multiple assessments in such labels.
• Score: 3.6754294738197264
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: The spread of misinformation through online social media platforms has had substantial societal consequences. As a result, platforms have introduced measures to alert users of news content that may be misleading or contain inaccuracies as a means to discourage them from sharing it. These interventions sometimes cite external sources, such as fact-checking organizations and news outlets, for providing assessments related to the accuracy of the content. However, it is unclear whether users trust the assessments provided by these entities and whether perceptions vary across different topics of news. We conducted an online study with 655 US participants to explore user perceptions of eight categories of fact-checking entities across two misinformation topics, as well as factors that may impact users' perceptions. We found that participants' opinions regarding the trustworthiness and bias of the entities varied greatly, aligning largely with their political preference. However, just the presence of a fact-checking label appeared to discourage participants from sharing the headlines studied. Our results hint at the need for further exploring fact-checking entities that may be perceived as neutral, as well as the potential for incorporating multiple assessments in such labels.

Related papers

• MisinfoEval: Generative AI in the Era of "Alternative Facts" [50.069577397751175]
  We introduce a framework for generating and evaluating large language model (LLM) based misinformation interventions. We present (1) an experiment with a simulated social media environment to measure effectiveness of misinformation interventions, and (2) a second experiment with personalized explanations tailored to the demographics and beliefs of users. Our findings confirm that LLM-based interventions are highly effective at correcting user behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-13T18:16:50Z)
• Susceptibility to Unreliable Information Sources: Swift Adoption with Minimal Exposure [10.288282142373976]
  Users tend to adopt low-credibility sources with fewer exposures than high-credibility sources. The adoption of information sources often mirrors users' prior exposure to sources with comparable credibility levels.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-09T20:16:06Z)
• Unveiling the Hidden Agenda: Biases in News Reporting and Consumption [59.55900146668931]
  We build a six-year dataset on the Italian vaccine debate and adopt a Bayesian latent space model to identify narrative and selection biases. We found a nonlinear relationship between biases and engagement, with higher engagement for extreme positions. Analysis of news consumption on Twitter reveals common audiences among news outlets with similar ideological positions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-14T18:58:42Z)
• Informing Users: Effects of Notification Properties and User Characteristics on Sharing Attitudes [5.371337604556311]
  Information sharing on social networks is ubiquitous, intuitive, and occasionally accidental. People may be unaware of the potential negative consequences of disclosures, such as reputational damages. We investigate how to aid informed sharing decisions and associate them with the potential outcomes via notifications.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-05T20:39:02Z)
• News consumption and social media regulations policy [70.31753171707005]
  We analyze two social media that enforced opposite moderation methods, Twitter and Gab, to assess the interplay between news consumption and content regulation. Our results show that the presence of moderation pursued by Twitter produces a significant reduction of questionable content. The lack of clear regulation on Gab results in the tendency of the user to engage with both types of content, showing a slight preference for the questionable ones which may account for a dissing/endorsement behavior.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-06-07T19:26:32Z)
• Misinfo Belief Frames: A Case Study on Covid & Climate News [49.979419711713795]
  We propose a formalism for understanding how readers perceive the reliability of news and the impact of misinformation. We introduce the Misinfo Belief Frames (MBF) corpus, a dataset of 66k inferences over 23.5k headlines. Our results using large-scale language modeling to predict misinformation frames show that machine-generated inferences can influence readers' trust in news headlines.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-04-18T09:50:11Z)
• Causal Understanding of Fake News Dissemination on Social Media [50.4854427067898]
  We argue that it is critical to understand what user attributes potentially cause users to share fake news. In fake news dissemination, confounders can be characterized by fake news sharing behavior that inherently relates to user attributes and online activities. We propose a principled approach to alleviating selection bias in fake news dissemination.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-20T19:37:04Z)
• Information Consumption and Social Response in a Segregated Environment: the Case of Gab [74.5095691235917]
  This work provides a characterization of the interaction patterns within Gab around the COVID-19 topic. We find that there are no strong statistical differences in the social response to questionable and reliable content. Our results provide insights toward the understanding of coordinated inauthentic behavior and on the early-warning of information operation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T11:34:25Z)

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.