Fake News through the Eyes of Three Generations of Russians: Differences and Similarities in Social Representations.

IF 1.1 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychology in Russia-State of the Art Pub Date : 2022-03-30 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.11621/pir.2022.0106
Alexander Sh Tkhostov, Alexander M Rikel, Margarita Ye Vialkova
{"title":"Fake News through the Eyes of Three Generations of Russians: Differences and Similarities in Social Representations.","authors":"Alexander Sh Tkhostov, Alexander M Rikel, Margarita Ye Vialkova","doi":"10.11621/pir.2022.0106","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The problem of fake news becomes especially prominent during periods of social exacerbation, such as the coronavirus pandemic, wherein the events have a significant impact on many lives. Generational differences are considered as a factor affecting perceptions of the reliability of news.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of this study was to reveal and compare the social representations of information reliability and news verification criteria among people belonging to the Generation of Reforms (born 1968-1981), the Millennial Generation (1982-2000) and Generation Z (2001 and later) in Russia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The study involved 431 participants and was comprised of two stages: focus groups and a survey. The data analysis methods employed were thematic analysis, qualitative and quantitative content analysis, coefficient of positive answers (according to J. Abric), Kruskal-Wallis H test, Pearson's chi-square test, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, and Kendall's t-rank correlation coefficient.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We have found significant differences between the Generation of Reforms (CPA: 80,5; p = 0,000) and Generation Z (CPA: 90,2; p = 0,000), and similarities between the Millennial Generation (CPA: 90,3; p = 0,000) and Generation Z, in the structure and content of social representations regarding \"fakes\". Notably, Generation Z favors a fact-checking strategy to identify news reliability, while \"Reformists\" rely on offline contacts.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Generations in Russia differ with respect to their tolerance of \"fakes\" and their strategies for news verification. The results advance our understanding of \"fakes\" as purely social constructs. The attribution of media incompetence to older and younger cohorts by each other was discussed as the generational conflict.</p>","PeriodicalId":44621,"journal":{"name":"Psychology in Russia-State of the Art","volume":"15 1","pages":"83-102"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9845006/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology in Russia-State of the Art","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2022.0106","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The problem of fake news becomes especially prominent during periods of social exacerbation, such as the coronavirus pandemic, wherein the events have a significant impact on many lives. Generational differences are considered as a factor affecting perceptions of the reliability of news.

Objective: The aim of this study was to reveal and compare the social representations of information reliability and news verification criteria among people belonging to the Generation of Reforms (born 1968-1981), the Millennial Generation (1982-2000) and Generation Z (2001 and later) in Russia.

Design: The study involved 431 participants and was comprised of two stages: focus groups and a survey. The data analysis methods employed were thematic analysis, qualitative and quantitative content analysis, coefficient of positive answers (according to J. Abric), Kruskal-Wallis H test, Pearson's chi-square test, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, and Kendall's t-rank correlation coefficient.

Results: We have found significant differences between the Generation of Reforms (CPA: 80,5; p = 0,000) and Generation Z (CPA: 90,2; p = 0,000), and similarities between the Millennial Generation (CPA: 90,3; p = 0,000) and Generation Z, in the structure and content of social representations regarding "fakes". Notably, Generation Z favors a fact-checking strategy to identify news reliability, while "Reformists" rely on offline contacts.

Conclusion: Generations in Russia differ with respect to their tolerance of "fakes" and their strategies for news verification. The results advance our understanding of "fakes" as purely social constructs. The attribution of media incompetence to older and younger cohorts by each other was discussed as the generational conflict.

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
三代俄罗斯人眼中的假新闻:社会表象的异同。
背景:假新闻问题在冠状病毒大流行等社会恶化时期尤为突出,因为这些事件对许多人的生活产生了重大影响。代际差异被认为是影响人们对新闻可靠性看法的一个因素:本研究旨在揭示和比较俄罗斯改革一代(1968-1981 年出生)、千禧一代(1982-2000 年出生)和 Z 世代(2001 年及以后出生)对信息可靠性和新闻核实标准的社会表述:研究涉及 431 名参与者,包括两个阶段:焦点小组和调查。采用的数据分析方法包括主题分析、定性和定量内容分析、肯定回答系数(根据 J. Abric)、Kruskal-Wallis H 检验、皮尔逊卡方检验、斯皮尔曼等级相关系数和 Kendall's t-rank 相关系数:我们发现,改革一代(CPA:80.5;P = 0.000)和 Z 世代(CPA:90.2;P = 0.000)在有关 "假货 "的社会表征结构和内容方面存在明显差异,而千禧一代(CPA:90.3;P = 0.000)和 Z 世代则存在相似之处。值得注意的是,"Z 世代 "倾向于采用事实核查策略来识别新闻的可靠性,而 "改革派 "则依赖于线下联系:结论:俄罗斯各代人对 "假新闻 "的容忍度和新闻核实策略各不相同。研究结果推进了我们对 "假新闻 "这一纯粹社会建构的理解。年长一代和年轻一代将媒体的无能归咎于对方,这就是代际冲突。
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
Psychology in Russia-State of the Art
Psychology in Russia-State of the Art PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
11.10%
发文量
11
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Established in 2008, the Russian Psychological Society''s Journal «Psychology in Russia: State of the Art» publishes original research on all aspects of general psychology including cognitive, clinical, developmental, social, neuropsychology, psychophysiology, psychology of labor and ergonomics, and methodology of psychological science. Journal''s list of authors comprises prominent scientists, practitioners and experts from leading Russian universities, research institutions, state ministries and private practice. Addressing current challenges of psychology, it also reviews developments in novel areas such as security, sport, and art psychology, as well as psychology of negotiations, cyberspace and virtual reality. The journal builds upon theoretical foundations laid by the works of Vygotsky, Luria and other Russian scientists whose works contributed to shaping the psychological science worldwide, and welcomes international submissions which make major contributions across the range of psychology, especially appreciating the ones conducted in the paradigm of the Russian psychological tradition. It enjoys a wide international readership and features reports of empirical studies, book reviews and theoretical contributions, which aim to further our understanding of psychology.
期刊最新文献
Agentic Self-regulation of Capoeira Athletes of Different Sports Qualifications. "I Am a Football Player and/or a Girl": Psychosemantics of Self-Consciousness among Teenage Female Football Players. Analysis of Eye and Head Tracking Movements During a Puck-Hitting Task in Ice Hockey Players, Compared to Wrestlers and Controls. Assessing Motivational Factors in Young Serbian Athletes: A Validation Study of the Sport Motivation Scale-II. Competitive Anxiety and Mood States in High-Performance Cuban Student Athletes.
×
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