网络假新闻的舆论传播与信仰变化:系统回顾

IF 4.3 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Filipe Altoe, Catarina Moreira, H. Sofia Pinto, Joaquim A. Jorge
{"title":"网络假新闻的舆论传播与信仰变化:系统回顾","authors":"Filipe Altoe,&nbsp;Catarina Moreira,&nbsp;H. Sofia Pinto,&nbsp;Joaquim A. Jorge","doi":"10.1155/2024/1069670","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Fake news has been linked to the rise of psychological disorders, the increased disbelief in science, and the erosion of democracy and freedom of speech. Online social networks are arguably the main vehicle of fake news spread. Educating online users with explanations is one way of preventing this spread. Understanding how online belief is formed and changed may offer a roadmap for such education. The literature includes surveys addressing online opinion formation and polarization; however, they usually address a single domain, such as politics, online marketing, health, and education, and do not make online belief change their primary focus. Unlike other studies, this work is the first to present a cross-domain systematic literature review of user studies, methodologies, and opinion model dimensions. It also includes the orthogonal polarization dimension, focusing on online belief change. We include peer-reviewed works published in 2020 and later found in four relevant scientific databases, excluding theoretical publications that did not offer validation through dataset experimentation or simulation. Bibliometric networks were constructed for better visualization, leading to the organization of the papers that passed the review criteria into a comprehensive taxonomy. Our findings show that a person’s individuality is the most significant influential force in online belief change. We show that online arguments that balance facts with emotionally evoking content are more efficient in changing their beliefs. Polarization was shown to be cross-correlated among multiple subjects, with politics being the central polarization pole. Polarized online networks start as networks with high opinion segregation, evolve into subnetworks of consensus, and achieve polarization around social network influencers. Trust in the information source was demonstrated to be the chief psychological construct that drives online users to polarization. This shows that changing the beliefs of influencers may create a positive snowball effect in changing the beliefs of polarized online social network users. These findings lay the groundwork for further research on using personalized explanations to reduce the harmful effects of online fake news on social networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":36408,"journal":{"name":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","volume":"2024 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/1069670","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Online Fake News Opinion Spread and Belief Change: A Systematic Review\",\"authors\":\"Filipe Altoe,&nbsp;Catarina Moreira,&nbsp;H. Sofia Pinto,&nbsp;Joaquim A. Jorge\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2024/1069670\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Fake news has been linked to the rise of psychological disorders, the increased disbelief in science, and the erosion of democracy and freedom of speech. Online social networks are arguably the main vehicle of fake news spread. Educating online users with explanations is one way of preventing this spread. Understanding how online belief is formed and changed may offer a roadmap for such education. The literature includes surveys addressing online opinion formation and polarization; however, they usually address a single domain, such as politics, online marketing, health, and education, and do not make online belief change their primary focus. Unlike other studies, this work is the first to present a cross-domain systematic literature review of user studies, methodologies, and opinion model dimensions. It also includes the orthogonal polarization dimension, focusing on online belief change. We include peer-reviewed works published in 2020 and later found in four relevant scientific databases, excluding theoretical publications that did not offer validation through dataset experimentation or simulation. Bibliometric networks were constructed for better visualization, leading to the organization of the papers that passed the review criteria into a comprehensive taxonomy. Our findings show that a person’s individuality is the most significant influential force in online belief change. We show that online arguments that balance facts with emotionally evoking content are more efficient in changing their beliefs. Polarization was shown to be cross-correlated among multiple subjects, with politics being the central polarization pole. Polarized online networks start as networks with high opinion segregation, evolve into subnetworks of consensus, and achieve polarization around social network influencers. Trust in the information source was demonstrated to be the chief psychological construct that drives online users to polarization. This shows that changing the beliefs of influencers may create a positive snowball effect in changing the beliefs of polarized online social network users. These findings lay the groundwork for further research on using personalized explanations to reduce the harmful effects of online fake news on social networks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36408,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies\",\"volume\":\"2024 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/2024/1069670\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/1069670\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/2024/1069670","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

假新闻与心理疾病的增加、对科学的不信任感增强以及民主和言论自由的削弱有关。在线社交网络可以说是假新闻传播的主要载体。对网络用户进行解释教育是防止假新闻传播的一种方法。了解网络信仰是如何形成和改变的,可以为此类教育提供路线图。文献中包括针对网络舆论形成和两极分化的调查;然而,这些调查通常针对单一领域,如政治、网络营销、健康和教育,并没有把网络信仰的改变作为主要关注点。与其他研究不同的是,本研究首次对用户研究、方法论和舆论模型维度进行了跨领域的系统性文献综述。它还包括正交极化维度,重点关注在线信念变化。我们收录了 2020 年及以后在四个相关科学数据库中发表的经同行评审的作品,不包括未通过数据集实验或模拟验证的理论出版物。为了更好地实现可视化,我们构建了文献计量网络,从而将通过审查标准的论文整理成一个全面的分类法。我们的研究结果表明,一个人的个性是网络信仰变化中最重要的影响因素。我们的研究结果表明,兼顾事实与情感的在线论证更能有效地改变人们的信念。研究表明,两极分化在多个研究对象之间存在交叉关联,而政治是两极分化的核心。两极分化的在线网络一开始是意见高度分离的网络,后来演变成达成共识的子网络,并在社交网络影响者周围实现两极分化。对信息来源的信任被证明是促使网络用户极化的主要心理因素。这表明,改变有影响力者的信念可能会产生积极的滚雪球效应,改变极化的在线社交网络用户的信念。这些发现为进一步研究如何利用个性化解释来减少网络假新闻对社交网络的有害影响奠定了基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Online Fake News Opinion Spread and Belief Change: A Systematic Review

Fake news has been linked to the rise of psychological disorders, the increased disbelief in science, and the erosion of democracy and freedom of speech. Online social networks are arguably the main vehicle of fake news spread. Educating online users with explanations is one way of preventing this spread. Understanding how online belief is formed and changed may offer a roadmap for such education. The literature includes surveys addressing online opinion formation and polarization; however, they usually address a single domain, such as politics, online marketing, health, and education, and do not make online belief change their primary focus. Unlike other studies, this work is the first to present a cross-domain systematic literature review of user studies, methodologies, and opinion model dimensions. It also includes the orthogonal polarization dimension, focusing on online belief change. We include peer-reviewed works published in 2020 and later found in four relevant scientific databases, excluding theoretical publications that did not offer validation through dataset experimentation or simulation. Bibliometric networks were constructed for better visualization, leading to the organization of the papers that passed the review criteria into a comprehensive taxonomy. Our findings show that a person’s individuality is the most significant influential force in online belief change. We show that online arguments that balance facts with emotionally evoking content are more efficient in changing their beliefs. Polarization was shown to be cross-correlated among multiple subjects, with politics being the central polarization pole. Polarized online networks start as networks with high opinion segregation, evolve into subnetworks of consensus, and achieve polarization around social network influencers. Trust in the information source was demonstrated to be the chief psychological construct that drives online users to polarization. This shows that changing the beliefs of influencers may create a positive snowball effect in changing the beliefs of polarized online social network users. These findings lay the groundwork for further research on using personalized explanations to reduce the harmful effects of online fake news on social networks.

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
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies
Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
17.20
自引率
8.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies is an interdisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-impact research that enhances understanding of the complex interactions between diverse human behavior and emerging digital technologies.
×
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