Correcting campaign misinformation: Experimental evidence from a two-wave panel study

László Horváth, Daniel Stevens, Susan Banducci, Raluca Popp, Travis Coan
{"title":"Correcting campaign misinformation: Experimental evidence from a two-wave panel study","authors":"László Horváth, Daniel Stevens, Susan Banducci, Raluca Popp, Travis Coan","doi":"10.37016/mr-2020-132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this study, we used a two-wave panel and a real-world intervention during the 2017 UK general election to investigate whether fact-checking can reduce beliefs in an incorrect campaign claim, source effects, the duration of source effects, and how predispositions including political orientations and prior exposure condition them. We find correction effects in the short term only, but across different political divisions and various prior exposure levels. We discuss the significance of independent fact-checking sources and the UK partisan press in facilitating effects.","PeriodicalId":93289,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","volume":"31 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Kennedy School misinformation review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this study, we used a two-wave panel and a real-world intervention during the 2017 UK general election to investigate whether fact-checking can reduce beliefs in an incorrect campaign claim, source effects, the duration of source effects, and how predispositions including political orientations and prior exposure condition them. We find correction effects in the short term only, but across different political divisions and various prior exposure levels. We discuss the significance of independent fact-checking sources and the UK partisan press in facilitating effects.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
纠正竞选活动中的错误信息:来自两波小组研究的实验证据
在本研究中,我们使用了一个两波面板和一个在 2017 年英国大选期间进行的真实世界干预,以调查事实核查是否能减少对不正确竞选主张的信念、来源效应、来源效应的持续时间,以及包括政治取向和先前接触在内的预设如何影响它们。我们发现校正效应只在短期内产生,但会跨越不同的政治分歧和不同的先前接触水平。我们讨论了独立事实核查来源和英国党派媒体在促进效应方面的重要性。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
20.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊最新文献
Taking the power back: How diaspora community organizations are fighting misinformation spread on encrypted messaging apps Who reports witnessing and performing corrections on social media in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, and France? The spread of synthetic media on X #SaveTheChildren: A pilot study of a social media movement co-opted by conspiracy theorists US-skepticism and transnational conspiracy in the 2024 Taiwanese presidential election
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1