Misinformation interventions are common, divisive, and poorly understood

Emily Saltz, Soubhik Barari, Claire Leibowicz, C. Wardle
{"title":"Misinformation interventions are common, divisive, and poorly understood","authors":"Emily Saltz, Soubhik Barari, Claire Leibowicz, C. Wardle","doi":"10.37016/mr-2020-81","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Social media platforms label, remove, or otherwise intervene on thousands of posts containing misleading or inaccurate information every day. Who encounters these interventions, and how do they react? A demographically representative survey of 1,207 Americans reveals that 49% have been exposed to some form of online misinformation intervention. However, most are not well-informed about what kinds of systems, both algorithmic and human, are applying these interventions: 40% believe that content is mostly or all checked, and 17.5% are not sure, with errors attributed to biased judgment more than any other cause, across political parties. Although support for interventions differs considerably by political party, other distinct traits predict support, including trust in institutions, frequent social media usage, and exposure to “appropriate” interventions.","PeriodicalId":93289,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-81","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

Social media platforms label, remove, or otherwise intervene on thousands of posts containing misleading or inaccurate information every day. Who encounters these interventions, and how do they react? A demographically representative survey of 1,207 Americans reveals that 49% have been exposed to some form of online misinformation intervention. However, most are not well-informed about what kinds of systems, both algorithmic and human, are applying these interventions: 40% believe that content is mostly or all checked, and 17.5% are not sure, with errors attributed to biased judgment more than any other cause, across political parties. Although support for interventions differs considerably by political party, other distinct traits predict support, including trust in institutions, frequent social media usage, and exposure to “appropriate” interventions.
错误的信息干预是常见的,分裂的,和理解不足
社交媒体平台每天标记、删除或以其他方式干预数千条包含误导或不准确信息的帖子。谁会遇到这些干预措施,他们会如何反应?一项针对1207名美国人的具有人口统计学代表性的调查显示,49%的人接触过某种形式的网络错误信息干预。然而,大多数人并不清楚是什么样的系统,包括算法和人类,在应用这些干预措施:40%的人认为内容大部分或全部都经过了检查,17.5%的人不确定,在各个政党中,错误更多地归因于有偏见的判断,而不是任何其他原因。尽管对干预措施的支持因政党而异,但其他不同的特征预测了支持,包括对机构的信任、频繁使用社交媒体以及接触“适当”干预措施。
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
20.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信