Understanding and combatting misinformation across 16 countries on six continents

IF 21.4 1区 心理学 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES Nature Human Behaviour Pub Date : 2023-06-29 DOI:10.1038/s41562-023-01641-6
Antonio A. Arechar, Jennifer Allen, Adam J. Berinsky, Rocky Cole, Ziv Epstein, Kiran Garimella, Andrew Gully, Jackson G. Lu, Robert M. Ross, Michael N. Stagnaro, Yunhao Zhang, Gordon Pennycook, David G. Rand
{"title":"Understanding and combatting misinformation across 16 countries on six continents","authors":"Antonio A. Arechar, Jennifer Allen, Adam J. Berinsky, Rocky Cole, Ziv Epstein, Kiran Garimella, Andrew Gully, Jackson G. Lu, Robert M. Ross, Michael N. Stagnaro, Yunhao Zhang, Gordon Pennycook, David G. Rand","doi":"10.1038/s41562-023-01641-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The spread of misinformation online is a global problem that requires global solutions. To that end, we conducted an experiment in 16 countries across 6 continents (N = 34,286; 676,605 observations) to investigate predictors of susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19, and interventions to combat the spread of this misinformation. In every country, participants with a more analytic cognitive style and stronger accuracy-related motivations were better at discerning truth from falsehood; valuing democracy was also associated with greater truth discernment, whereas endorsement of individual responsibility over government support was negatively associated with truth discernment in most countries. Subtly prompting people to think about accuracy had a generally positive effect on the veracity of news that people were willing to share across countries, as did minimal digital literacy tips. Finally, aggregating the ratings of our non-expert participants was able to differentiate true from false headlines with high accuracy in all countries via the ‘wisdom of crowds’. The consistent patterns we observe suggest that the psychological factors underlying the misinformation challenge are similar across different regional settings, and that similar solutions may be broadly effective. Across 16 countries, this research finds consistent cognitive and social predictors of COVID-19 misinformation susceptibility, and shows how accuracy prompts and literacy tips reduce misinformation sharing and how wisdom of crowds can identify false claims cross-culturally.","PeriodicalId":19074,"journal":{"name":"Nature Human Behaviour","volume":"7 9","pages":"1502-1513"},"PeriodicalIF":21.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Human Behaviour","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-023-01641-6","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

The spread of misinformation online is a global problem that requires global solutions. To that end, we conducted an experiment in 16 countries across 6 continents (N = 34,286; 676,605 observations) to investigate predictors of susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19, and interventions to combat the spread of this misinformation. In every country, participants with a more analytic cognitive style and stronger accuracy-related motivations were better at discerning truth from falsehood; valuing democracy was also associated with greater truth discernment, whereas endorsement of individual responsibility over government support was negatively associated with truth discernment in most countries. Subtly prompting people to think about accuracy had a generally positive effect on the veracity of news that people were willing to share across countries, as did minimal digital literacy tips. Finally, aggregating the ratings of our non-expert participants was able to differentiate true from false headlines with high accuracy in all countries via the ‘wisdom of crowds’. The consistent patterns we observe suggest that the psychological factors underlying the misinformation challenge are similar across different regional settings, and that similar solutions may be broadly effective. Across 16 countries, this research finds consistent cognitive and social predictors of COVID-19 misinformation susceptibility, and shows how accuracy prompts and literacy tips reduce misinformation sharing and how wisdom of crowds can identify false claims cross-culturally.

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
了解和打击六大洲16个国家的错误信息。
网上错误信息的传播是一个全球性问题,需要全球性的解决方案。为此,我们在6大洲的16个国家进行了一项实验(N = 34286;676605次观察),以调查对新冠肺炎错误信息易感性的预测因素,以及对抗这种错误信息传播的干预措施。在每个国家,具有更具分析性认知风格和更强的准确性相关动机的参与者更善于辨别真伪;重视民主也与更大的真相辨别力有关,而在大多数国家,支持个人责任而非政府支持与真相辨别力呈负相关。微妙地促使人们思考准确性,对人们愿意在各国分享的新闻的真实性产生了普遍的积极影响,最低限度的数字素养提示也是如此。最后,通过“群众智慧”,汇总我们的非专家参与者的评分,能够在所有国家以高精度区分头条新闻的真实性和虚假性。我们观察到的一致模式表明,在不同的地区环境中,错误信息挑战背后的心理因素是相似的,类似的解决方案可能广泛有效。
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
Nature Human Behaviour
Nature Human Behaviour Psychology-Social Psychology
CiteScore
36.80
自引率
1.00%
发文量
227
期刊介绍: Nature Human Behaviour is a journal that focuses on publishing research of outstanding significance into any aspect of human behavior.The research can cover various areas such as psychological, biological, and social bases of human behavior.It also includes the study of origins, development, and disorders related to human behavior.The primary aim of the journal is to increase the visibility of research in the field and enhance its societal reach and impact.
期刊最新文献
Period poverty is a continuing global challenge Why current menstrual policies do not work Broadening menstrual health approaches is key to improving adolescent outcomes Why we should care about trans people and menstruation Open and inclusive communication is key to managing menstrual health
×
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