Humanities and Social Sciences Communications,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
11(1)
Опубликована: Март 14, 2024
Abstract
Rumors
about
COVID-19
have
been
prevalent
around
the
world
during
pandemic.
Using
a
veracity
judgment
task,
present
study
investigates
whether
young
adults
(
N
=
112)
demonstrated
measurable
differences
in
processing
rumors
They
were
instructed
to
read
statement
related
and
then
evaluate
it
was
true
or
false.
We
examine
influence
of
content
characteristics
demographic
variables
on
reading
times,
accuracy
rates,
response
times
judgment.
found
that
only
influenced
by
length
rumors.
Participants
spent
more
time
rumor
when
longer.
The
also
rates
less
accurate
Furthermore,
we
participants
faster
at
correctly
rejecting
false
than
accepting
Importantly,
significant
effect
family
socioeconomic
status
(SES)
for
which
from
families
with
higher
SES
had
Our
results
both
(i.e.,
length)
SES)
Perspectives on Psychological Science,
Год журнала:
2023,
Номер
19(5), С. 781 - 795
Опубликована: Сен. 26, 2023
Recent
studies
have
documented
the
type
of
content
that
is
most
likely
to
spread
widely,
or
go
“viral,”
on
social
media,
yet
little
known
about
people’s
perceptions
what
goes
viral
should
viral.
This
critical
understand
because
there
widespread
debate
how
improve
regulate
media
algorithms.
We
recruited
a
sample
participants
nationally
representative
U.S.
population
(according
age,
gender,
and
race/ethnicity)
surveyed
them
their
virality
(
n
=
511).
In
line
with
prior
research,
people
believe
divisive
content,
moral
outrage,
negative
high-arousal
misinformation
are
all
online.
However,
they
reported
this
not
media.
Instead,
many
forms
positive
content—such
as
accurate
nuanced
educational
content—are
even
though
think
These
were
shared
among
only
weakly
related
political
orientation,
usage,
demographic
variables.
sum,
broad
consensus
around
platforms
amplify,
which
can
help
inform
solutions
for
improving
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
27(5), С. 1050 - 1067
Опубликована: Апрель 7, 2024
By
assuming
that
a
group
of
nefarious
actors
collude
to
harm
perceiver’s
ingroup,
conspiracy
theories
are
an
intergroup
phenomenon.
What
the
group-oriented
motivations
underlying
belief
in
theories?
This
contribution
proposes
associated
with
both
symbolic,
identity-based
and
realistic,
harm-based
motivations.
As
symbolic
motivations,
help
people
develop,
maintain,
protect
positive
social
identity.
Conspiracy
can
unite
through
shared
system,
provide
basis
for
favorable
comparison,
enable
perceivers
attribute
ingroup
status
threats
external
forces
beyond
their
control.
realistic
prepare
conflict
other
groups.
transform
abstract
sense
distrust
into
concrete
allegations
misconduct.
provides
signal
outgroup
is
threatening,
mobilizes
promotes
readiness
fight.
I
discuss
implications
these
processes
theory
practice.
Nature Medicine,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
30(11), С. 3085 - 3093
Опубликована: Окт. 25, 2024
In
addition
to
social
determinants
of
health,
such
as
economic
resources,
education,
access
care
and
various
environmental
factors,
there
is
growing
evidence
that
political
polarization
poses
a
substantial
risk
individual
collective
well-being.
Here
we
review
the
impact
on
public
health.
We
describe
different
forms
how
they
are
connected
health
outcomes,
highlighting
COVID-19
pandemic
case
study
risks
polarization.
then
offer
strategies
for
mitigating
potential
harms
associated
with
polarization,
an
emphasis
building
trust.
Finally,
propose
future
research
directions
this
topic,
underscore
need
more
work
in
global
context
encourage
greater
collaboration
between
scientists
medical
scientists.
conclude
serious—if
largely
overlooked—determinant
whose
impacts
must
be
thoroughly
understood
mitigated.
Political
understudied
determinant
This
Review
describes
types
populations
individuals,
including
mitigation
priorities.
Annals of the International Communication Association,
Год журнала:
2023,
Номер
47(4), С. 381 - 410
Опубликована: Июнь 20, 2023
Despite
growing
concerns
and
rapidly
expanding
research
about
health
misinformation,
answers
to
some
fundamental
questions
remain
unclear.
Among
the
open
are
definition
of
misinformation
(what
is
misinformation?),
psychological
drivers
susceptibility
(why
do
people
believe
it?)
effective
interventions
for
reducing
impact
(how
counter
it?).
In
this
in-depth
review
critical
analysis
literature
on
we
seek
answer
these
by
proposing
a
tentative
comprehensive
model
systematic
framework
countering
while
addressing
ongoing
debate
scale
problem
effectiveness
current
interventions.
Psychological Science,
Год журнала:
2024,
Номер
35(4), С. 435 - 450
Опубликована: Март 20, 2024
The
spread
of
misinformation
is
a
pressing
societal
challenge.
Prior
work
shows
that
shifting
attention
to
accuracy
increases
the
quality
people’s
news-sharing
decisions.
However,
researchers
disagree
on
whether
accuracy-prompt
interventions
for
U.S.
Republicans/conservatives
and
partisanship
moderates
effect.
In
this
preregistered
adversarial
collaboration,
we
tested
question
using
multiverse
meta-analysis
(
k
=
21;
N
27,828).
all
70
models,
prompts
improved
sharing
discernment
among
Republicans/conservatives.
We
observed
significant
partisan
moderation
single-headline
“evaluation”
treatments
(a
critical
test
one
research
team)
such
effect
was
stronger
Democrats
than
Republicans.
not
consistently
robust
across
different
operationalizations
ideology/partisanship,
exclusion
criteria,
or
treatment
type.
Overall,
in
50%
specifications
(all
which
were
considered
other
team).
discuss
conditions
under
offer
interpretations.
Community-based
fact-checking
is
a
promising
approach
to
fact-check
social
media
content
at
scale.
However,
an
understanding
of
whether
users
trust
community
fact-checks
missing.
Here,
we
presented
The
spread
of
misinformation
has
become
a
central
concern
in
American
politics.
Recent
studies
social
media
sharing
suggest
that
Republicans
are
considerably
more
likely
to
share
fake
news
than
Democrats.
However,
such
inferences
confounded
by
the
far
greater
supply
right-leaning
news—Republicans
may
indeed
be
prone
news,
or
they
simply
exposed
it.
This
article
disentangles
these
competing
explanations
examining
intentions
balanced
information
environment.
Using
large
national
survey
YouGov
respondents,
we
show
ideologically
concordant
Democrats,
but
this
gap
is
not
enough
explain
differences
observed
online.
Encouragingly,
however,
also
find
accuracy
prompt
interventions
reduce
equally
effective
across
parties,
suggesting
among
an
intractable
problem.
