The majority of fact-checking labels in the United States are intense and this decreases engagement intention
Dados Bibliográficos
AUTOR(ES) | |
---|---|
AFILIAÇÃO(ÕES) | Department of Communication, University of California , Davis, |
ANO | 2024 |
TIPO | Artigo |
PERIÓDICO | Human Communication Research |
ISSN | 0360-3989 |
E-ISSN | 1468-2958 |
EDITORA | Sage Publications (United States) |
DOI | 10.1093/hcr/hqae007 |
CITAÇÕES | 1 |
ADICIONADO EM | 2025-08-18 |
Resumo
Fact-checking labels have been widely accepted as an effective misinformation correction method. However, there is limited theoretical understanding of fact-checking labels' impact. This study theorizes that language intensity influences fact-checking label processing and tests this idea through a multi-method design. We first rely on a large-scale observational dataset of fact-checking labels from 7 U.S. fact-checking organizations (N = 33,755) to examine the labels' language intensity and then use a controlled online experiment in the United States (N = 656) to systematically test the causal effects of fact-checking label intensity (low, moderate, or high) and fact-checking source (professional journalists or artificial intelligence) on perceived message credibility of and the intention to engage with fact-checking messages. We found that two-thirds of existing labels were intense. Such high-intensity labels had null effects on messages' perceived credibility, yet decreased engagement intention, especially when labels were attributed to AI. Using more intense labels may not be an effective fact-checking approach.