科学家的信息失调行为:系统回顾

IF 1.8 4区 管理学 Q3 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Jorge Revez, Luís Corujo
{"title":"科学家的信息失调行为:系统回顾","authors":"Jorge Revez, Luís Corujo","doi":"10.1177/01655515241244460","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How are scientists coping with misinformation and disinformation? Focusing on the triangle scientists/mis-disinformation/behaviour, this study aims to systematically review the literature to answer three research questions: What are the main approaches described in the literature concerning scientists’ behaviour towards mis-disinformation? Which techniques or strategies are discussed to tackle information disorder? Is there a research gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects concerning information disorder tackling strategies? Following PRISMA 2020 statement, a checklist and flow diagram for reporting systematic reviews, a set of 14 documents was analysed. Findings revealed that the literature might be interpreted following Wilson and Maceviciute’s model as creation, acceptance and dissemination categories. Crossing over these categories, we advanced three standing points to analyse scientists’ positions towards mis-disinformation: inside, inside-out and outside-in. The stage ‘Creation/facilitation’ was the least present in our sample, but ‘Use/rejection/acceptance’ and ‘Dissemination’ were depicted in the literature retrieved. Most of the literature approaches were about inside-out perspectives, meaning that the topic is mainly studied concerning communication issues. Regarding the strategies against the information disorder, findings suggest that preventive and reactive strategies are simultaneously used. A strong appeal to a multidisciplinary effort against mis-disinformation is widely present, but there is a gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects.","PeriodicalId":54796,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Information Science","volume":"25 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientists’ behaviour towards information disorder: A systematic review\",\"authors\":\"Jorge Revez, Luís Corujo\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/01655515241244460\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"How are scientists coping with misinformation and disinformation? Focusing on the triangle scientists/mis-disinformation/behaviour, this study aims to systematically review the literature to answer three research questions: What are the main approaches described in the literature concerning scientists’ behaviour towards mis-disinformation? Which techniques or strategies are discussed to tackle information disorder? Is there a research gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects concerning information disorder tackling strategies? Following PRISMA 2020 statement, a checklist and flow diagram for reporting systematic reviews, a set of 14 documents was analysed. Findings revealed that the literature might be interpreted following Wilson and Maceviciute’s model as creation, acceptance and dissemination categories. Crossing over these categories, we advanced three standing points to analyse scientists’ positions towards mis-disinformation: inside, inside-out and outside-in. The stage ‘Creation/facilitation’ was the least present in our sample, but ‘Use/rejection/acceptance’ and ‘Dissemination’ were depicted in the literature retrieved. Most of the literature approaches were about inside-out perspectives, meaning that the topic is mainly studied concerning communication issues. Regarding the strategies against the information disorder, findings suggest that preventive and reactive strategies are simultaneously used. A strong appeal to a multidisciplinary effort against mis-disinformation is widely present, but there is a gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54796,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Information Science\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Information Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"94\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241244460\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Information Science","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01655515241244460","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

科学家如何应对错误信息和虚假信息?本研究以 "科学家/错误信息/行为 "三角为重点,旨在系统回顾文献,回答三个研究问题:文献中描述的科学家应对错误信息行为的主要方法有哪些?讨论了哪些应对信息失调的技术或策略?将科学家作为信息失调应对策略研究项目的主体是否存在研究空白?根据 PRISMA 2020 声明、系统综述报告核对表和流程图,对 14 篇文献进行了分析。研究结果表明,这些文献可以按照威尔逊和梅斯维丘特的模型进行解读,分为创造、接受和传播三个类别。跨越这些类别,我们提出了三个立足点来分析科学家对错误信息的立场:内部、自内而外和自外而内。在我们的样本中,"创造/促进 "阶段出现得最少,但 "使用/拒绝/接受 "和 "传播 "在检索到的文献中都有描述。大多数文献的研究方法都是从内向外的角度出发,这意味着该主题的研究主要涉及传播问题。关于应对信息失调的策略,研究结果表明,预防和应对策略同时使用。人们普遍强烈呼吁多学科合作,共同应对错误信息,但在将科学家作为研究项目的主体方面还存在差距。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Scientists’ behaviour towards information disorder: A systematic review
How are scientists coping with misinformation and disinformation? Focusing on the triangle scientists/mis-disinformation/behaviour, this study aims to systematically review the literature to answer three research questions: What are the main approaches described in the literature concerning scientists’ behaviour towards mis-disinformation? Which techniques or strategies are discussed to tackle information disorder? Is there a research gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects concerning information disorder tackling strategies? Following PRISMA 2020 statement, a checklist and flow diagram for reporting systematic reviews, a set of 14 documents was analysed. Findings revealed that the literature might be interpreted following Wilson and Maceviciute’s model as creation, acceptance and dissemination categories. Crossing over these categories, we advanced three standing points to analyse scientists’ positions towards mis-disinformation: inside, inside-out and outside-in. The stage ‘Creation/facilitation’ was the least present in our sample, but ‘Use/rejection/acceptance’ and ‘Dissemination’ were depicted in the literature retrieved. Most of the literature approaches were about inside-out perspectives, meaning that the topic is mainly studied concerning communication issues. Regarding the strategies against the information disorder, findings suggest that preventive and reactive strategies are simultaneously used. A strong appeal to a multidisciplinary effort against mis-disinformation is widely present, but there is a gap in including scientists as subjects of research projects.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Information Science
Journal of Information Science 工程技术-计算机:信息系统
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
121
审稿时长
4 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Information Science is a peer-reviewed international journal of high repute covering topics of interest to all those researching and working in the sciences of information and knowledge management. The Editors welcome material on any aspect of information science theory, policy, application or practice that will advance thinking in the field.
×
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