Public support for misinformation interventions depends on perceived fairness, effectiveness, and intrusiveness

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2508.05849v2
• Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2025 17:58:50 GMT
• Title: Public support for misinformation interventions depends on perceived fairness, effectiveness, and intrusiveness
• Authors: Catherine King, Samantha C. Phillips, Kathleen M. Carley,
• Abstract summary: We asked 1,010 American social media users to rate their support for and perceptions of ten misinformation interventions implemented by the government or social media companies.<n>Our results indicate that the perceived fairness of the intervention is the most important factor in determining support.<n>It is critical to understand which interventions are supported and why, as public opinion can play a key role in the rollout and effectiveness of policies.
• Score: 1.1661238776379117
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
• Abstract: The proliferation of misinformation on social media has concerning possible consequences, such as the degradation of democratic norms. While recent research on countering misinformation has largely focused on analyzing the effectiveness of interventions, the factors associated with public support for these interventions have received little attention. We asked 1,010 American social media users to rate their support for and perceptions of ten misinformation interventions implemented by the government or social media companies. Our results indicate that the perceived fairness of the intervention is the most important factor in determining support, followed by the perceived effectiveness of that intervention and then the intrusiveness. Interventions that supported user agency and transparency, such as labeling content or fact-checking ads, were more popular than those that involved moderating or removing content or accounts. We found some demographic differences in support levels, with Democrats and women supporting interventions more and finding them more fair, more effective, and less intrusive than Republicans and men, respectively. It is critical to understand which interventions are supported and why, as public opinion can play a key role in the rollout and effectiveness of policies.

Related papers

• Community Notes are Vulnerable to Rater Bias and Manipulation [75.34858521118305]
  We evaluate the Community Notes algorithm using simulated data that models realistic rater and note behaviors.<n>We find that the algorithm suppresses a substantial fraction of genuinely helpful notes and is highly sensitive to rater biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-04T14:39:34Z)
• UK Finfluencers: Exploring Content, Reach, and Responsibility [0.0]
  This study investigates the patterns and behaviours of finfluencers in the UK on TikTok.<n>The aim is to identify common engagement patterns and propose guidelines that can help protect the public from potential financial harm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-03T22:28:36Z)
• 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)
• Decoding the Silent Majority: Inducing Belief Augmented Social Graph with Large Language Model for Response Forecasting [74.68371461260946]
  SocialSense is a framework that induces a belief-centered graph on top of an existent social network, along with graph-based propagation to capture social dynamics. Our method surpasses existing state-of-the-art in experimental evaluations for both zero-shot and supervised settings.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-20T06:17:02Z)
• Understanding Divergent Framing of the Supreme Court Controversies: Social Media vs. News Outlets [56.67097829383139]
  We focus on the nuanced distinctions in framing of social media and traditional media outlets concerning a series of U.S. Supreme Court rulings. We observe significant polarization in the news media's treatment of affirmative action and abortion rights, whereas the topic of student loans tends to exhibit a greater degree of consensus.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-18T06:40:21Z)
• How can we combat online misinformation? A systematic overview of current interventions and their efficacy [4.4628294018254495]
  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.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-22T16:59:33Z)
• One of Many: Assessing User-level Effects of Moderation Interventions on r/The_Donald [1.1041211464412573]
  We evaluate the user level effects of the sequence of moderation interventions that targeted r/The_Donald on Reddit. We find that interventions having strong community level effects also cause extreme and diversified user level reactions. Our results highlight that platform and community level effects are not always representative of the underlying behavior of individuals or smaller user groups.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-09-19T07:46:18Z)
• 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)
• Social Media COVID-19 Misinformation Interventions Viewed Positively, But Have Limited Impact [16.484676698355884]
  Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter rolled out design interventions, including banners linking to authoritative resources and more specific "false information" labels. We found that most participants indicated a positive attitude towards interventions, particularly post-specific labels for misinformation. Still, the majority of participants discovered or corrected misinformation through other means, most commonly web searches, suggesting room for platforms to do more to stem the spread of COVID-19 misinformation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-12-21T00:02:04Z)
• Deception and the Strategy of Influence [0.7874708385247353]
  We explore how methods of deception including audience building, media hijacking, and community subversion inform the techniques and tradecraft of today's influence operators. We then discuss how a properly equipped and informed public can diagnose and counter malign influence operations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-11-02T21:39:00Z)
• 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)
• Quantifying the Vulnerabilities of the Online Public Square to Adversarial Manipulation Tactics [43.98568073610101]
  We use a social media model to quantify the impacts of several adversarial manipulation tactics on the quality of content. We find that the presence of influential accounts, a hallmark of social media, exacerbates the vulnerabilities of online communities to manipulation. These insights suggest countermeasures that platforms could employ to increase the resilience of social media users to manipulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2019-07-13T21:12:08Z)

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.