How and why does official information become misinformation? A typology of official misinformation

IF 2.4 3区 管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Hilda Ruokolainen, Gunilla Widén, Eeva-Liisa Eskola
{"title":"How and why does official information become misinformation? A typology of official misinformation","authors":"Hilda Ruokolainen,&nbsp;Gunilla Widén,&nbsp;Eeva-Liisa Eskola","doi":"10.1016/j.lisr.2023.101237","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>It is important to widen the understanding of misinformation in different contexts. The findings of this qualitative study showed that official information can be misinformation. Official information, which is information concerning and/or coming from official services and processes, was studied with semi-structured interviews in two contexts in which support with information was needed. Four types of misinformation were found: outdated, conflicting, and incomplete information and perceived intimidation. Official information has characteristics related to structural factors, language, and terminology, as well as encounters that make it prone to misinformation. A typology of official misinformation was created to show the nuanced nature of misinformation and the different social, contextual, and situational factors surrounding misinformation. In-person support may be needed to tackle misinformation. Official information can be made clearer and more suited to different groups, which also diminishes the risk of misinformation.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47618,"journal":{"name":"Library & Information Science Research","volume":"45 2","pages":"Article 101237"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library & Information Science Research","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0740818823000130","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

It is important to widen the understanding of misinformation in different contexts. The findings of this qualitative study showed that official information can be misinformation. Official information, which is information concerning and/or coming from official services and processes, was studied with semi-structured interviews in two contexts in which support with information was needed. Four types of misinformation were found: outdated, conflicting, and incomplete information and perceived intimidation. Official information has characteristics related to structural factors, language, and terminology, as well as encounters that make it prone to misinformation. A typology of official misinformation was created to show the nuanced nature of misinformation and the different social, contextual, and situational factors surrounding misinformation. In-person support may be needed to tackle misinformation. Official information can be made clearer and more suited to different groups, which also diminishes the risk of misinformation.

官方信息如何以及为什么会变成错误信息?官方错误信息的一种类型
在不同的背景下扩大对错误信息的理解是很重要的。这项定性研究的结果表明,官方信息可能是错误的。官方资料,即有关和(或)来自官方服务和程序的资料,在两种需要资料支持的情况下通过半结构化访谈进行了研究。他们发现了四种类型的错误信息:过时的、相互矛盾的、不完整的信息和感知到的恐吓。官方信息具有与结构因素、语言和术语相关的特征,以及使其容易产生错误信息的遭遇。官方错误信息的类型学是为了显示错误信息的微妙本质以及围绕错误信息的不同社会、上下文和情境因素。可能需要面对面的支持来解决错误信息。官方信息可以变得更清晰,更适合不同的群体,这也减少了错误信息的风险。
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
Library & Information Science Research
Library & Information Science Research INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
6.90%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Library & Information Science Research, a cross-disciplinary and refereed journal, focuses on the research process in library and information science as well as research findings and, where applicable, their practical applications and significance. All papers are subject to a double-blind reviewing process.
×
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