Understanding Fake News Corrective Action: A Mixed-Method Approach

Recent scholarship deals with the spread of fake news in social media, suggesting viable ways to slow down the spread of misinformation. Effective documented interventions rely on fake news identification and peer corrective actions. Based on a mixed-method convergent design, this study independently (1) investigates how citizens develop strategies to identify fake news and generate rational motivations to engage in corrective actions (Study 1, 51 in-depth adults’ interviews in Spain) and (2) tests the direct and indirect effects, via cognitive news elaboration, of traditional, social media

[1]  Homero Gil de Zúñiga,et al.  Antecedents and consequences of fake news exposure: a two-panel study on how news use and different indicators of fake news exposure affect media trust , 2023, Human Communication Research.

[2]  Homero Gil de Zúñiga,et al.  Intervening Troubled Marketplace of Ideas: How to Redeem Trust in Media and Social Institutions From Pseudo-Information , 2022, American Behavioral Scientist.

[3]  L. Bode,et al.  Assessing the relative merits of news literacy and corrections in responding to misinformation on Twitter , 2021, New Media Soc..

[4]  M. Goyanes,et al.  Beyond positive or negative: Understanding the phenomenology, typologies and impact of incidental news exposure on citizens’ daily lives , 2020, New Media Soc..

[5]  Stella C. Chia,et al.  The Battle is On: Factors that Motivate People to Combat Anti-Vaccine Misinformation , 2020, Health communication.

[6]  Homero Gil de Zúñiga,et al.  Peripheral elaboration model: The impact of incidental news exposure on political participation , 2020 .

[7]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  Mobilizing Users: Does Exposure to Misinformation and Its Correction Affect Users’ Responses to a Health Misinformation Post? , 2020 .

[8]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  Do the right thing: Tone may not affect correction of misinformation on social media , 2020, Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review.

[9]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  Testing the Effectiveness of Correction Placement and Type on Instagram , 2020 .

[10]  David G. Rand,et al.  Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. , 2020, Journal of personality.

[11]  Rich Ling,et al.  Diffusion of disinformation: How social media users respond to fake news and why , 2020, Journalism.

[12]  Nathan Walter,et al.  A Meta-Analytic Examination of the Continued Influence of Misinformation in the Face of Correction: How Powerful Is It, Why Does It Happen, and How to Stop It? , 2020, Communication Research.

[13]  Brian E. Weeks,et al.  What’s Next? Six Observations for the Future of Political Misinformation Research , 2019, American Behavioral Scientist.

[14]  David G. Rand,et al.  Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning , 2019, Cognition.

[15]  Andrew Chadwick,et al.  News sharing on UK social media: misinformation, disinformation, and correction , 2019 .

[16]  S. Lecheler,et al.  Fake news as a two-dimensional phenomenon: a framework and research agenda , 2019, Annals of the International Communication Association.

[17]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Making sense of credibility in complex information environments: the role of message sidedness, information source, and thinking styles in credibility evaluation online , 2018, Information, Communication & Society.

[18]  L. Bode,et al.  See Something, Say Something: Correction of Global Health Misinformation on Social Media , 2018, Health communication.

[19]  David G. Rand,et al.  Prior Exposure Increases Perceived Accuracy of Fake News , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[20]  Ashley Muddiman,et al.  Correcting Political and Consumer Misperceptions: The Effectiveness and Effects of Rating Scale Versus Contextual Correction Formats , 2018 .

[21]  Andrew J. Flanagin.  Online Social Influence and the Convergence of Mass and Interpersonal Communication , 2017 .

[22]  Emily K. Vraga,et al.  Using Expert Sources to Correct Health Misinformation in Social Media , 2017 .

[23]  Kate Starbird,et al.  A Closer Look at the Self-Correcting Crowd: Examining Corrections in Online Rumors , 2017, CSCW.

[24]  Joon Soo Lim.  The Third-Person Effect of Online Advertising of Cosmetic Surgery: A Path Model for Predicting Restrictive Versus Corrective Actions , 2017 .

[25]  M. Gentzkow,et al.  Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election , 2017 .

[26]  Andy S. L. Tan,et al.  Exposure to Health (Mis)Information: Lagged Effects on Young Adults' Health Behaviors and Potential Pathways , 2015 .

[27]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Psychological Approaches to Credibility Assessment Online , 2015 .

[28]  S. Sundar,et al.  The Handbook of the Psychology of Communication Technology , 2015 .

[29]  H. G. D. Zúñiga,et al.  Social Media, Political Expression, and Political Participation: Panel Analysis of Lagged and Concurrent Relationships , 2014 .

[30]  Jennifer Jerit,et al.  Partisan Perceptual Bias and the Information Environment , 2012 .

[31]  Nakwon Jung,et al.  The Mediating Role of Knowledge and Efficacy in the Effects of Communication on Political Participation , 2011 .

[32]  Hernando Rojas.  “Corrective” Actions in the Public Sphere: How Perceptions of Media and Media Effects Shape Political Behaviors , 2010 .

[33]  Miriam J. Metzger,et al.  Social and Heuristic Approaches to Credibility Evaluation Online , 2010 .

[34]  Dhavan V. Shah,et al.  COMMUNICATION THEORY Communication Theory ISSN 1050-3293 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Campaigns, Reflection, and Deliberation: Advancing an O-S-R-O-R Model of Communication Effects , 2022 .

[35]  V. Braun,et al.  Using thematic analysis in psychology , 2006 .

[36]  Miejeong Han,et al.  Media Use and Participatory Democracy in South Korea , 2005 .

[37]  D. R. Danielson,et al.  How do users evaluate the credibility of Web sites?: a study with over 2,500 participants , 2003, DUX '03.

[38]  William P. Eveland.  The Cognitive Mediation Model of Learning From the News , 2001, Commun. Res..

[39]  Mira Sotirovic, Jack M. McLeod.  Values, Communication Behavior, and Political Participation , 2001 .

[40]  Annie Lang,et al.  The limited capacity model of mediated message processing , 2000 .

[41]  Franziska Marquart,et al.  Communication and persuasion : central and peripheral routes to attitude change , 1988 .

[42]  B. Morton.  Fake news. , 2018, Marine pollution bulletin.

[43]  David L. Vannette.  Best Practices for Survey Research , 2018 .

[44]  H. G. D. Zúñiga.  Los atributos de la discusión política interpersonal como antecedentes de la elaboración cognitiva / Attributes of Interpersonal Political Discussion as Antecedents of Cognitive Elaboration , 2017 .

[45]  Ullrich K. H. Ecker,et al.  Misinformation and Its Correction , 2012, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[46]  S. Sundar.  The MAIN Model : A Heuristic Approach to Understanding Technology Effects on Credibility , 2007 .

[47]  M. Patton.  Qualitative research & evaluation methods , 2002 .

[48]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.