Watch Out
Fake! How Warning Labels Affect Laypeople’s Evaluation of Simplified Scientific Misinformation
Dados Bibliográficos
| ID | 11273643 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Lisa Scharrer (0000-0003-2748-4570, Goethe University Frankfurt, autor correspondente), Vanessa Pape (Ruhr University Bochum), Marc Stadtler (0000-0002-2948-9837, Ruhr University Bochum) |
| Ano | 2022 |
| Volume | 59 |
| Fascículo | 8 |
| Páginas | 575-590 |
| Data de publicação | 2022-09-14 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sim |
| Open Access | Não |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Periódico | Discourse Processes (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores do periódico | ISSN: 0163-853X • E-ISSN: 1532-6950 |
| Editora | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/0163853x.2022.2096364 |
| OpenAlex | W4285038039 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citações recebidas | 5 |
| Referências citadas | 39 |
Research has shown that laypeople tend to rely on their own evaluations when encountering scientific text information that is easy to comprehend. This easiness effect of science popularization leaves them vulnerable to uncritically accepting misinformation presented in a simplified manner. The present study investigated whether warnings of misinformation frequently used in social networks and other online services mitigate or even prevent the persuasive advantage of information easiness. Forty-one medical laypeople read brief argumentative online texts proposing fictitious health claims. Texts were either easy or difficult to comprehend, and they either were or were not labeled with a warning that independent fact-checkers dispute the information. Results showed that warnings effectively increased laypeople’s skepticism toward scientific misinformation. However, findings also suggested that warnings do not reduce the persuasive advantage of misinformation presented in an easily understandable manner, pointing to the limits of this communicative tool
Affect (linguistics · Argumentative · Computer security · Epistemology · Internet privacy · Misinformation · Scientific evidence · Skepticism · Social media · World Wide Web · Climate Change Communication and Perception · Communication · Computer Science · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology · Social Psychology
Do Heuristic Cues Affect Misinformation Sharing? Evidence From a Meta-Analysis
What Influences Audience Susceptibility to Fake Health News
The Identification of Advantages and Deficiencies of Current Digital Health Science Popularization in China
Trust and Safety on Social Media
How laypeople evaluate scientific explanations containing jargon
I Just Don't Trust Them
Repetition increases perceived truth equally for plausible and implausible statements
Cleaning Up Social Media
A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition
The Public's Bounded Understanding of Science
G*Power 3
Pandemics and infodemics
Jargon as a barrier to effective science communication
When science becomes too easy
A Question of Accuracy
A Culture of ConspiracyApocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America
Fighting Covid-19 Misinformation on Social Media
Here’s Hoping It’s not Just Text Structure
Easy to Understand but Difficult to Decide
Scientific Explanation and the Sense of Understanding
Inferring the popularity of an opinion from its familiarity
Real Solutions for Fake News? Measuring the Effectiveness of General Warnings and Fact-Check Tags in Reducing Belief in False Stories on Social Media
Simple politics for the people? Complexity in campaign messages and political knowledge
Advancing Science Communication
The effectiveness of short-format refutational fact-checks
| Obras citantes distintas | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citações por ano | 1,67 |
| Intervalo de citações | 2023 - 2026 (4) |
| Velocidade de citação | current |
| Altamente citado | Não |
| Tipos de citação | Neutras: 5 |