Trust issues: Adolescents' epistemic vigilance towards online sources

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL British Journal of Developmental Psychology Pub Date : 2025-03-26 DOI:10.1111/bjdp.12559
Pip Brown, Michaela Gummerum
{"title":"Trust issues: Adolescents' epistemic vigilance towards online sources","authors":"Pip Brown,&nbsp;Michaela Gummerum","doi":"10.1111/bjdp.12559","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Development of epistemic vigilance towards online information is crucial for adolescents in the context of widespread online ‘information pollution’. Children have demonstrated selective mistrust of webpages with typographical but not semantic errors. We used a selective trust task to investigate whether this pattern changes through adolescence. Participants read two pairs of sources about scientific topics, each pair containing a webpage with either semantic or typographical errors. When asked novel factual questions, which source participants drew answers from indicates the degree of selective trust in the source. As anticipated, age group significantly predicted selective trust scores, with older adolescents (<i>N</i> = 222, 16–20 years, <i>M</i> = 18 years) receiving higher scores than younger adolescents (<i>N</i> = 153, 11–16 years, <i>M</i> = 13.7 years.). While this age effect was present in both typographical and semantic conditions, it was particularly pronounced for semantic errors. Additionally, pre-exposure to an accuracy prompt was not a significant factor in selective trust scores, demonstrating some limitations in the utility of this prime for more complex selective trust decisions. We theorize that semantic errors may have more salience than typographical errors for older adolescents' selective trust decisions, whereas younger adolescents place more emphasis on a visual understanding of source credibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":51418,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Developmental Psychology","volume":"43 3","pages":"578-594"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bjdp.12559","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Developmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://bpspsychub.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bjdp.12559","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Development of epistemic vigilance towards online information is crucial for adolescents in the context of widespread online ‘information pollution’. Children have demonstrated selective mistrust of webpages with typographical but not semantic errors. We used a selective trust task to investigate whether this pattern changes through adolescence. Participants read two pairs of sources about scientific topics, each pair containing a webpage with either semantic or typographical errors. When asked novel factual questions, which source participants drew answers from indicates the degree of selective trust in the source. As anticipated, age group significantly predicted selective trust scores, with older adolescents (N = 222, 16–20 years, M = 18 years) receiving higher scores than younger adolescents (N = 153, 11–16 years, M = 13.7 years.). While this age effect was present in both typographical and semantic conditions, it was particularly pronounced for semantic errors. Additionally, pre-exposure to an accuracy prompt was not a significant factor in selective trust scores, demonstrating some limitations in the utility of this prime for more complex selective trust decisions. We theorize that semantic errors may have more salience than typographical errors for older adolescents' selective trust decisions, whereas younger adolescents place more emphasis on a visual understanding of source credibility.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
信任问题:青少年对网络资源的认知警觉。
在广泛的网络“信息污染”背景下,对网络信息的认知警惕性的发展对青少年至关重要。儿童表现出选择性不信任网页印刷错误,而不是语义错误。我们使用选择性信任任务来调查这种模式在青春期是否会改变。参与者阅读两组有关科学主题的资料,每对资料都包含一个带有语义或排版错误的网页。当被问及新颖的事实性问题时,参与者从哪个来源得到答案表明了他们对来源的选择性信任程度。正如预期的那样,年龄对选择性信任得分有显著影响,年龄较大的青少年(N = 222, 16-20岁,M = 18岁)得分高于年龄较小的青少年(N = 153, 11-16岁,M = 13.7岁)。虽然这种年龄效应在排版和语义条件下都存在,但在语义错误中尤为明显。此外,预暴露于准确性提示并不是选择性信任得分的重要因素,这表明在更复杂的选择性信任决策中,这个素数的效用有一些局限性。我们推测,对于年龄较大的青少年的选择性信任决策,语义错误可能比印刷错误更突出,而年龄较小的青少年更强调对来源可信度的视觉理解。
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
British Journal of Developmental Psychology
British Journal of Developmental Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Developmental Psychology publishes full-length, empirical, conceptual, review and discussion papers, as well as brief reports, in all of the following areas: - motor, perceptual, cognitive, social and emotional development in infancy; - social, emotional and personality development in childhood, adolescence and adulthood; - cognitive and socio-cognitive development in childhood, adolescence and adulthood, including the development of language, mathematics, theory of mind, drawings, spatial cognition, biological and societal understanding; - atypical development, including developmental disorders, learning difficulties/disabilities and sensory impairments;
期刊最新文献
Faces and phases of epistemic curiosity in science learning: A longitudinal study. Profiles of sibling relationships among Chinese adolescents: The contribution of parental differential treatment of siblings. Leveraging community science to encourage a more inclusive and culturally representative developmental science. A systematic review of school-based interventions to promote digital resilience in children. Issue Information
×
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:604180095
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