Why do we not stand up to misinformation? Factors influencing the likelihood of challenging misinformation on social media and the role of demographics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11239731 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Selin Gurgun (0000-0001-9803-955X, Bournemouth University, corresponding author), Deniz Cemiloglu (0000-0003-4725-3868, Bournemouth University), Emily Arden Close (0000-0002-5954-2598, Bournemouth University), Keith Phalp (0000-0003-4458-686X, Bournemouth University), Preslav Nakov (0000-0002-3600-1510, Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence), Raian Ali (0000-0002-5285-7829, Hamad bin Khalifa University) |
| Year | 2024 |
| Volume | 76 |
| Pages | 102444 |
| Publication date | 2024-03-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Technology in Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0160-791X • E-ISSN: 1879-3274 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102444 |
| OpenAlex | W4389505568 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 12 |
| References cited | 111 |
This study investigates the barriers to challenging others who post misinformation on social media platforms. We conducted a survey amongst U.K. Facebook users (143 (57.2 %) women, 104 (41.6 %) men) to assess the extent to which the barriers to correcting others, as identified in literature across disciplines, apply to correcting misinformation on social media. We also group the barriers into factors and explore demographic differences amongst them. It has been suggested that users are generally hesitant to challenge misinformation. We found that most of our participants (58.8 %) were reluctant to challenge misinformation. We also identified moderating roles of age and gender in the likelihood of challenging misinformation. Older people were more likely to challenge misinformation compared to young adults while, men demonstrated a slightly greater likelihood to challenge compared to women. The 20 barriers influencing the decision to challenge misinformation, were then grouped into four main factors: social concerns, effort/interest considerations, prosocial intents, and content-related factors. We found that, controlling for age and gender, “social concerns” and “effort/interest considerations” have the significant impact on likelihood to challenge. Identified four factors were analysed in terms of demographic differences. Men ranked “effort/interest considerations” higher than women, while women placed higher importance on “content-related factors”. Moreover, older individuals were found to be more resilient to “social concerns”. The influence of educational background was most prominent in ranking “content-related factors”. Our findings provide important insights for the design of future interventions aimed at encouraging the challenging of misinformation on social media platforms, highlighting the need for tailored, demographically sensitive approaches
Computer security · Demographics · Internet privacy · Misinformation · Political science · Public relations · Social media · Sociology · Computer Science · Demography · Media Influence and Health · Misinformation and Its Impacts · Psychology · Social Media and Politics · Social Psychology
Motivated by Design
Designing social media to foster user engagement in challenging misinformation
News-Finds-Me Perception, Substance Use Misinformation Beliefs, and Nonmedical Prescription Drug Use
How do people typically respond to social exclusion on social media? Clustering and personas from UK and Arab samples
Young people and false information
The pursuit of online misinformation literacy
Navigating the social media market
Older Adults’ Response Strategies to Misinformation on Social Media
Beyond engagement
I Trust You, but Let Me Talk to AI
Desinformación y población sénior
Remedial behavior for misinformation
Misinformation and Polarization in a High-Choice Media Environment
A Longitudinal Field Investigation of Gender Differences in Individual Technology Adoption Decision-Making Processes
The top five reasons for lurking
The contribution of social network sites to exposure to political difference
A Review of Exploratory Factor Analysis Decisions and Overview of Current Practices
Employee Silence on Critical Work Issues
Why people use social media
Implicit Voice Theories
Student Participation in the College Classroom
Do I Hear the Whistle…? A First Attempt to Measure Four Forms of Employee Silence and Their Correlates
A Beginner’s Guide to Factor Analysis
Social Desirability Bias
“Was It Something I Said?” “No, It Was Something You Posted!” A Study of the Spiral of Silence Theory in Social Media Contexts
How individual sensitivities to disagreement shape youth political expression on Facebook
The Spiral of Silence and Public Opinion on Affirmative Action
G*Power 3
An Index of Factorial Simplicity
Antecedents of News Avoidance
The Battle is On
What Motivates People to Correct Misinformation? Examining the Effects of Third-person Perceptions and Perceived Norms
To correct or not to correct? Social identity threats increase willingness to denounce fake news through presumed media influence and hostile media perceptions
Absolute monopoly, areas of control or democracy? Examining gender differences in health participation on social media
Personal attacks decrease user activity in social networking platforms
“You might as well just all agree with each other
I do not believe you
Closing the gap
Facing an uncertain reception
Exploring the Forms of Self-Censorship
Does Media Violence Predict Societal Violence? It Depends on What You Look at and When
The Spiral of Silence a Theory of Public Opinion
Why People Use Social Networking Sites
The spiral of silence
Sociality Through Social Network Sites
Effects of anonymity, invisibility, and lack of eye-contact on toxic online disinhibition
Who does what on Facebook? Age, sex, and relationship status as predictors of Facebook use
Mirror, Mirror on my Facebook Wall
How Many Subjects Does It Take To Do A Regression Analysis
Countering Misinformation and Fake News Through Inoculation and Prebunking
Minority influence
Fake news self-efficacy, fake news identification, and content sharing on Facebook
Designing and Testing News Literacy Messages for Social Media
Norm evolution and violation on Facebook
Does the platform matter? Social media and Covid-19 conspiracy theory beliefs in 17 countries
Norms of online expressions of emotion
Young people’s everyday political talk
The fake news game
Online silence
Gen.com
Social Networks that Matter
Gay Bullying and Online Opinion Expression
Conflict and conflict management
It’s Better Saying I Look Fat Instead of Saying You Look Fat”
Factors affecting camera mobile phone adoption before e-shopping in the Arab world
Technophobia
At what sample size do correlations stabilize
Interpersonal feedback in everyday life
On Reluctance to Communicate Undesirable Information
Understanding Classroom Interaction
Excuse Me—What Did You Just Say
Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses
African American College Students’ Experiences With Everyday Racism
The Scree Test For The Number Of Factors
The Online Disinhibition Effect
Diffusion of disinformation
Avoiding real news, believing in fake news? Investigating pathways from information overload to misbelief
When Corrections Fail
Mobilizing the Young
Using Expert Sources to Correct Health Misinformation in Social Media
Correcting Misperceptions About Genetically Modified Food on Social Media
Empathic joy and the empathy-altruism hypothesis
I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately
Development of self-esteem from age 4 to 94 years
Do not Click 'Like' When Somebody has Died
Behavioral Strategies for Dealing with Flaming in An Online Forum
The Strength of Weak Ties
| Unique citing works | 12 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 6 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2026 (3) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 12 |