Is the alarm on deception ringing too loudly? The effects of different forms of misinformation warnings on risk perceptions of misinformation exposure

IF 1.8 2区 文学 Q2 COMMUNICATION
Michael Hameleers
{"title":"Is the alarm on deception ringing too loudly? The effects of different forms of misinformation warnings on risk perceptions of misinformation exposure","authors":"Michael Hameleers","doi":"10.1177/02673231241271015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Misinformation is widely regarded as an undermining force to European democracies. Yet, to date, empirical research shows that the amount of misinformation people encounter is rather low, and not in proportion to the strong alarming messages spread throughout society. In this light, current interventions that pre-bunk misinformation by using warning messages may disproportionally prime suspicion and result in inflated estimates of misinformation. To assess whether messages that pre-bunk misinformation result in disproportionate risk perceptions related to inaccurate or false information, and to explore the effectiveness of alternative interventions, this article relied on an online between-subjects experiment in the Netherlands ( N = 437). Our main findings indicate that exposure to a media literacy intervention does not result in higher first- or third-person risk perceptions related to misinformation exposure. However, a warning message that emphasizes the identification of reliable news while contextualizing the threats of misinformation significantly lowers perceived misinformation salience. As an important implication of our findings, we suggest that pre-bunking interventions should relativize the threats of misinformation by facilitating the recognition of honest and reliable information as an alternative path to help people identify reliable information.","PeriodicalId":47765,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231241271015","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Misinformation is widely regarded as an undermining force to European democracies. Yet, to date, empirical research shows that the amount of misinformation people encounter is rather low, and not in proportion to the strong alarming messages spread throughout society. In this light, current interventions that pre-bunk misinformation by using warning messages may disproportionally prime suspicion and result in inflated estimates of misinformation. To assess whether messages that pre-bunk misinformation result in disproportionate risk perceptions related to inaccurate or false information, and to explore the effectiveness of alternative interventions, this article relied on an online between-subjects experiment in the Netherlands ( N = 437). Our main findings indicate that exposure to a media literacy intervention does not result in higher first- or third-person risk perceptions related to misinformation exposure. However, a warning message that emphasizes the identification of reliable news while contextualizing the threats of misinformation significantly lowers perceived misinformation salience. As an important implication of our findings, we suggest that pre-bunking interventions should relativize the threats of misinformation by facilitating the recognition of honest and reliable information as an alternative path to help people identify reliable information.
关于欺骗的警钟是否敲得太响?不同形式的错误信息警告对错误信息风险认知的影响
人们普遍认为,错误信息是欧洲民主的破坏力量。然而,迄今为止,实证研究表明,人们遇到的误导信息数量相当少,与全社会传播的强烈警示信息不成比例。有鉴于此,目前通过使用警示信息来预先阻止误导信息的干预措施可能会不成比例地加剧人们的怀疑,并导致对误导信息的估计过高。为了评估预先揭穿错误信息的信息是否会导致与不准确或虚假信息相关的过度风险感知,并探索替代干预措施的有效性,本文在荷兰进行了一次在线主体间实验(N = 437)。我们的主要研究结果表明,接触媒体扫盲干预措施并不会导致与错误信息相关的第一人称或第三人称风险感知的提高。然而,在强调识别可靠新闻的同时将错误信息的威胁情景化的警告信息却能显著降低感知到的错误信息显著性。作为我们研究结果的一个重要意义,我们建议,揭露误导信息前的干预措施应通过促进人们识别诚实可靠的信息来相对化误导信息的威胁,以此作为帮助人们识别可靠信息的另一条途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
86
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Communication is interested in communication research and theory in all its diversity, and seeks to reflect and encourage the variety of intellectual traditions in the field and to promote dialogue between them. The Journal reflects the international character of communication scholarship and is addressed to a global scholarly community. Rigorously peer-reviewed, it publishes the best of research on communications and media, either by European scholars or of particular interest to them.
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信