Home  ›  what is one way to avoid being misled by journalism reports on scientific research?

what is one way to avoid being misled by journalism reports on scientific research?

Written By Monday 11 April 2022 Add Comment Edit

Imitation or incorrect data regardless of an intention to deceive

Misinformation is incorrect or misleading information presented equally fact,[1] either intentionally or unintentionally. Disinformation is a subset of misinformation, that which is deliberately deceptive.[2] [3] [4] Rumors are information not attributed to any particular source,[5] and so are unreliable and oft unverified, but tin can turn out to be either truthful or false. Even if later retracted, misinformation can proceed to influence actions and retention.[6] People may be more than prone to believe misinformation because they are emotionally connected to what they are hearing or reading. The role of social media has made information readily available to us at anytime and information technology connects vast groups of people along with their information at one time.[7] Advances in engineering science has impacted the way nosotros communicate data and the way misinformation is spread.[viii] Misinformation has impacts on our societies' power to receive information which then influences our communities, politics, and medical field.[7]

History [edit]

Early examples include the insults and smears spread amid political rivals in Majestic and Renaissance Italia in the form of "pasquinades."[ix] These are anonymous and witty verses named for the Pasquino piazza and "talking statue" in Rome. In pre-revolutionary France, "canards", or printed broadsides, sometimes included an engraving to convince readers to take them seriously.

According to misinformation writers Renee DiResta and Tobias Rose-Stockwell, in 1588, false news of the victory of the Spanish Fleet over the English (which had been expected) spread throughout Europe, and news of the bodily English victory came many days later.[10]

A lithograph from the first large scale spread of disinformation in America, "The Great Moon Hoax"

The first recorded big-scale disinformation campaign was the "Smashing Moon Hoax," published in 1835 in the New York Sun, in which a series of articles claimed to describe life on the Moon, "complete with illustrations of humanoid bat-creatures and bearded blue unicorns".[11] The challenges of mass-producing news on a brusk deadline can lead to factual errors and mistakes. An example of such is the Chicago Tribune's infamous 1948 headline "Dewey Defeats Truman".

Identification and correction [edit]

According to Anne Mintz, editor of Web of Deception: Misinformation on the Cyberspace, one of the all-time ways to make up one's mind whether the information is factual is to use common sense.[12] Mintz advises that the reader check whether the information makes sense, and to check whether the founders or reporters who are spreading the information are biased or have an agenda. Journalists and researchers look at other sites (particularly verified sources similar news channels)[thirteen] for data, as the information is more than likely to exist reviewed by multiple people or have been heavily researched, providing more reliable details.

Martin Libicki, author of Conquest In Cyberspace: National Security and Information Warfare,[14] noted that readers must balance what is correct or incorrect. Readers cannot be gullible, but as well should not be paranoid that all information is incorrect. There is always the risk that even readers who strike this balance volition believe an error to be true, or a truth to exist an error.

A person'southward formal education level and media literacy correlates with their power to recognize misinformation.[15] [16] This ways if a person is more familiar with the content and process of how the information is researched and presented or is better at critically evaluating data of whatever source, they are more likely to correctly place misinformation. Increasing literacy may not lead to improved ability to observe misinformation, as a certain level of literacy could exist used to "justify belief in misinformation."[17] Further research reveals that content descriptors tin can have varying effects on people'southward power to detect misinformation.[xviii]

Based on the work by Scheufele and Krause, misinformation has dissimilar social layers that occur at the private, grouping and sociostructural levels. At the Individual Root level of misinformation, efforts take sought to focus on the citizen'due south private ability to recognize disinformation or misinformation and thus correct their views based on what they received. Hence, the proposed solutions for these cases utilize side of news which range from altering algorithms that observe the root of fake news or fact bank check these unlike sites. The business is that having the "inability to recognize misinformation" leads to assumption that all citizens are misinformed and thus unable to discern and logically evaluate information that emerge from social media. What poses the largest threat is "evaluation skill" that is lacking amidst individuals to understand and identify the sources with biased, dated or exploitative sources. Interestingly plenty, Pew Enquiry reports shared that approximately one in four American adults admitted to sharing misinformation on their social media platforms. The quality of media literacy is also office of the problem contributing to the individual root level of misinformation. Hence, the call for improving media literacy is a necessity to educate private citizens on faux news. Other factors that influence misinformation at the individual level is motivations and emotion that influence motivated reasoning processes.[19]

The 2d root is at the group level. People'southward social networks have truly changed as the social media surroundings has evolved. Thus, assuasive a dissimilar spider web of social networks to persist assuasive individuals to ""selectively disclose"" information which unfortunately is in a biased format. Every bit we all take seen the furnishings of playing the Telephone Game with a large group of people, the aforementioned concept with the behavior that are near widespread become the most repeated. The trouble with debunking misinformation is that this tin backfire due to people relying only on the familiar information they had just been exposed to. The problem with the homogenous social groups is that it nurtures a misinformation mindset allowing for falsehood to be accustomed since it appears as possibly a social "norm" due to the subtract in contradictory information. Due to these social networks, information technology creates "clustering" effect which can end upward existence "specific rumor variations". These rumor variations lead to beliefs being perceived as more popular than they actually are causing a rumor cascade on these social networks.[19]

The third level of misinformation is the Societal level which is influenced by both the private and grouping levels. The common figures associated with misinformation include Politicians too as other political actors who attempt to shape the public opinion in their favor. The role of the mass media is to be a corrective agent to prevent misinformation to American citizens. Objectivity has been a mutual thread that American media has lacked existence a contributor to the plague of misinformation. As impress media evolved into radio, television and now the internet which go paw in paw with paid commercial actors to generate tailored content to attract viewers. The intent is to reach target audiences which has dramatically shifted with examples such every bit Facebook utilise their sources to have data drove as well as ""profiling"" tools that rails each users' preferences for products and let for ads that are hypertargeted for that viewer. Non only are these hypertargeted ads but they besides compete for younger audiences attention on social media which limit the amount of news sources viewed on a daily basis. The status of our order at this point is quoted best past the Axios cofounder Jim VandeHei who stated that ""Survival...depends on giving readers what they really desire, how they want information technology, when they want it, and on not spending too much money producing what they don't want."" Unfortunately, this is the climate of our culture when it comes to news quality. The change of these news realities are attributed to ""social mega trends"" which have been a huge contributor to the misinformation trouble of the United States. In add-on, the refuse in social capital, political polarization, gap in economic inequalities, pass up in trust in scientific discipline, and how the parties are susceptible likewise to misinformation.[19]

Cognitive factors [edit]

Prior research suggests it can be difficult to undo the furnishings of misinformation once individuals believe information technology to exist true, and that fact-checking can backfire.[twenty] Individuals may desire to reach a certain determination, causing them to accept data that supports that decision. Individuals are more likely to hang onto information and share information if information technology emotionally resonates with them.[21]

Individuals create mental models and schemas to sympathize their physical and social environments.[22] Misinformation that becomes incorporated into a mental model, especially for long periods of time, will be more hard to address as individuals adopt to accept a complete mental model.[23] In this example, it is necessary to correct the misinformation by both refuting it and providing accurate data that tin function in the mental model.[20] When attempting to correct misinformation, it is important to consider previous research which has identified effective and ineffective strategies. Just providing the corrected information is insufficient to correct the furnishings of misinformation, and it may even have a negative upshot. Due to the familiarity heuristic, information that is familiar is more likely to be believed to exist true—cosmetic messages which contain a repetition of the original misinformation may issue in an increase in familiarity and crusade a backfire upshot.[24]

Factors that contribute to the effectiveness of a cosmetic message include an private'due south mental model or worldview, repeated exposure to the misinformation, time betwixt misinformation and correction, credibility of the sources, and relative coherency of the misinformation and corrective message. Cosmetic messages will exist more effective when they are coherent and/or consequent with the audience's worldview. They will be less effective when misinformation is believed to come from a credible source, is repeated prior to correction (fifty-fifty if the repetition occurs in the procedure of debunking), and/or when there is a fourth dimension lag between the misinformation exposure and corrective message. Additionally, corrective messages delivered past the original source of the misinformation tend to be more than constructive.[25]

Countering misinformation [edit]

Ane suggested solution for prevention of misinformation is a distributed consensus mechanism to validate the accuracy of claims, with advisable flagging or removal of content that is determined to be false or misleading.[23] Another approach is to "inoculate" against it past delivering weakened misinformation that warns of the dangers of the misinformation. This includes counterarguments and showing the techniques used to mislead. One way to apply this is to use parallel argumentation, in which the flawed logic is transferred to a parallel situation (E.g. shared extremity or applesauce). This arroyo exposes bad logic without the need for complicated explanations.[26]

Flagging or eliminating false statements in media using algorithmic fact checkers is becoming an increasingly common tactic to fight misinformation. Reckoner programs that automatically notice misinformation are merely emerging, just similar algorithms are already in identify on Facebook and Google. Google provides supplemental information pointing to fact-checking websites in response to its users searching controversial search terms. Likewise, algorithms find and alert Facebook users that what they are about to share is likely imitation.[27]

A common related issue brought upwards is the over censorship of platforms like Facebook and Twitter.[28] Many free speech communication activists argue that their voices are not being heard and their rights being taken abroad.[29] To combat the spread of misinformation, social media platforms are often tasked with finding common footing between allowing free speech, while also not allowing misinformation to be spread throughout their respective platforms.[28]

Websites have been created to help people to discern fact from fiction. For instance, the site FactCheck.org aims to fact check the media, especially viral political stories. The site also includes a forum where people can openly ask questions most the information.[30] Similar sites permit individuals to copy and paste misinformation into a search engine and the site will investigate it.[31] Facebook and Google added automatic fact-checking programs to their sites, and created the option for users to flag information that they think is fake.[31] A way that fact-checking programs find misinformation involves analyzing the language and syntax of news stories. Another mode is fact-checkers can search for existing data on the subject area and compare it to the news broadcasts existence put online.[32] Other sites such equally Wikipedia and Snopes are also widely used resources for verifying information.

Causes [edit]

Historically, people accept relied on journalists and other information professionals to relay facts and truths.[33] Many dissimilar things crusade miscommunication but the underlying factor is information literacy. Because data is distributed past various means, it is frequently hard for users to ask questions of credibility. Many online sources of misinformation use techniques to fool users into thinking their sites are legitimate and the information they generate is factual. Oftentimes misinformation can exist politically motivated.[34] For case, websites such equally USConservativeToday.com have posted false information for political and budgetary gain.[35] Another part misinformation serves is to distract the public center from negative information about a given person and/or issues of policy.[27] Aside from political and financial gain, misinformation tin besides be spread unintentionally.

Misinformation cited with hyperlinks has been found to increase readers' trust. Trust is shown to be fifty-fifty higher when these hyperlinks are to scientific journals, and higher still when readers do not click on the sources to investigate for themselves.[36] Trusting a source could lead to spreading misinformation unintentionally.

Misinformation is sometimes an unintended side upshot of bias. Misguided opinions can pb to the unintentional spread of misinformation, where individuals do not intend on spreading false propaganda, yet the false information they share is not checked and referenced.[37] While that may be the case, there are plenty of instances where information is intentionally skewed, or leaves out major defining details and facts. Misinformation could be misleading rather than outright false.

Research documents "the role political elites play in shaping both news coverage and public stance around scientific discipline bug".[38]

Another reason for the recent spread of misinformation may be the lack of consequences. With footling to no repercussions, there is nothing to finish people from posting misleading information. The gain they become from the power of influencing other peoples' minds is greater than the impact of a removed post or temporary ban on Twitter. This forces individual companies to be the ones to mandate rules and policies regarding when people'south "complimentary speech" impedes other users' quality of life.[39]

Online misinformation [edit]

Digital and social media can contribute to the spread of misinformation – for instance, when users share data without showtime checking the legitimacy of the information they have found. People are more than likely to come across online information based on personalized algorithms. Google, Facebook and Yahoo News all generate newsfeeds based on the data they know about our devices, our location, and our online interests. Although ii people tin can search for the same thing at the same time, they are very likely to get different results based on what that platform deems relevant to their interests, fact or faux.[forty]

An emerging trend in the online data environment is "a shift away from public discourse to private, more ephemeral, messaging", which is a challenge to counter misinformation.[41]

Countermeasures [edit]

A report by the Royal Society lists potential or proposed countermeasures:[41]

  • Automated detection systems (e.thou. to flag or add context and resource to content)
  • Emerging anti-misinformation sector (e.g. organizations combating scientific misinformation)
  • Provenance enhancing technology (i.e. ameliorate enabling people to determine the veracity of a claim, image, or video)
  • APIs for research (i.east. for usage to discover, understand, and counter misinformation)
  • Agile bystanders
  • Customs moderation (commonly of unpaid and untrained, ofttimes independent, volunteers)
  • Anti-virals (due east.g. limiting the number of times a message can exist forwarded in privacy-respecting encrypted chats)
  • Collective intelligence (examples being Wikipedia where multiple editors refine encyclopedic articles, and question-and-answer sites where outputs are also evaluated by others similar to peer-review)
  • Trustworthy institutions and data
  • Media literacy (increasing citizens' power to employ ICTs to observe, evaluate, create, and communicate information, an essential skill for citizens of all ages)
    • Media literacy is taught in Estonian public schools – from kindergarten through to high school – since 2010 and "accustomed 'as important equally maths or writing or reading'"[42]

Broadly described, the report recommends building resilience to scientific misinformation and a salubrious online data environment and not having offending content removed. It cautions that censorship could eastward.k. drive misinformation and associated communities "to harder-to-address corners of the internet".[43]

[edit]

In the Information Age, social networking sites have become a notable agent for the spread of misinformation, fake news, and propaganda.[xvi] [45] [46] [47] [ excessive citations ] Misinformation on social media spreads rapidly in comparison to traditional media because of the lack of regulation and examination required before posting.[48] [49] These sites provide users with the adequacy to spread data quickly to other users without requiring the permission of a gatekeeper such equally an editor who might otherwise require confirmation of the truth earlier allowing publication. Journalists today are criticized for helping to spread false information on these social platforms, but enquiry shows they also play a role in curbing it through debunking and denying fake rumors.[l] [51]

Social media platforms let for piece of cake spread of misinformation.[52] The specific reasons why misinformation spreads through social media so easily remain unknown.[48] A 2018 written report of Twitter determined that, compared to accurate information, fake data spread significantly faster, further, deeper, and more broadly.[53] Similarly, a research study of Facebook constitute that misinformation was more probable to be clicked on than factual information.[54] Combating its spread is hard for ii reasons: the profusion of information sources, and the generation of "repeat chambers". The profusion of information sources makes the reader'southward task of weighing the reliability of information more challenging, heightened past the untrustworthy social signals that go with such data.[55] Repeat chambers and filter bubbles come up from the inclination of people to follow or support like-minded individuals. With no differing information to counter the untruths or the general understanding inside isolated social clusters, some fence the outcome is an absence of a collective reality.[56] Although social media sites have changed their algorithms to prevent the spread of fake news, the problem still exists.[57] Furthermore, inquiry has shown that while people may know what the scientific customs has proved every bit a fact, they may still decline to accept it as such.[58]

Social media's influence can be supported by scholars such equally Ghosh and Scott, who indicated that misinformation is "condign unstoppable."[59] It has also been observed that misinformation and disinformation come up back, multiple times on social media sites. A research written report watched the process of 13 rumors appearing on Twitter and noticed that 11 of those same stories resurfaced multiple times, later on much time had passed.[60]

A social media app called Parler has caused much chaos as well. Right winged Twitter users who were banned on the app moved to Parler after the Capitol Loma riots and the app was beingness used to plan and facilitate more illegal and dangerous activities. Google and Apple tree subsequently pulled the app off of the App Shop. This app has been able to cause a lot of misinformation and bias in the media allowing for more political mishaps.[61]

Some other reason that misinformation spreads on social media is from the users themselves. In a written report, information technology was shown that the most common reasons that Facebook users were sharing misinformation for socially-motivated reasons, rather than taking the information seriously.[62] Although users may not be spreading false information for malicious reasons, the misinformation is still existence spread. A research study shows that misinformation introduced through a social format influences individuals drastically more than misinformation delivered non-socially.[63] Facebook'due south coverage of misinformation has become a hot topic with the spread of COVID-19, every bit some reports indicated Facebook recommended pages containing health misinformation.[28] For example, this can be seen when a user likes an anti-vax Facebook page. Automatically, more than and more than anti-vax pages are recommended to the user.[28] Additionally, some reference Facebook's inconsistent censorship of misinformation leading to deaths from COVID-19.[28] Larry Cook, the creator of the "Stop Mandatory Vaccination" organization made money posting anti-vax simulated news on social media. He posted more than 150 posts aimed towards woman had over 1.6 million views and earned money on every click and share.[64]

Twitter is 1 of the almost concentrated platforms for engagement with political fake news. fourscore% of faux news sources are shared by 0.1% of users, who are "super-sharers". Older, more than conservative social users are likewise more than probable to collaborate with fake news.[62] On Facebook, adults older than 65 were vii times more likely to share fake news than adults ages 18–29.[53] Some other source of misinformation on Twitter are bot accounts, specially surrounding climate change.[65] Misinformation spread past bots has been difficult for social media platforms to address.[66] Facebook estimated the existence of upwards to 60 million troll bots actively spreading misinformation on their platform,[67] and has taken measures to stop the spread of misinformation, resulting in a subtract, though misinformation continues to exist on the platform.[68]

Spontaneous spread of misinformation on social media usually occurs from users sharing posts from friends or mutually-followed pages. These posts are often shared from someone the sharer believes they tin can trust. Other misinformation is created and spread with malicious intent. Sometimes to cause feet, other times to deceive audiences.[69] There are times when rumors are created with malicious intent, but shared past unknowing users.

With the large audiences that can be reached and the experts on various subjects on social media, some believe social media could besides be the fundamental to correcting misinformation. [70]

Amanuensis-based models and other computational models have been used by researchers to explicate how false behavior spread through networks. Epistemic network analysis is one case of computational method for evaluating connections in data shared in a social media network or similar network.[71] In The Misinformation Historic period: How False Beliefs Spread, a trade book past philosopher Cailin O'Connor and physicist James Owen Weatherall, the authors used a combination of case studies and agent-based models to show how false beliefs spread on social media and scientific networks.[72] [73] This book analyses the social nature of scientific inquiry; the nature of data menstruation betwixt scientists, propagandists, and politicians; and the spread of false beliefs among the general population.[72]

Lack of peer review [edit]

Promoting more Peer Review to benefit the accurateness in information.

Due to the decentralized nature and structure of the Internet, content creators can easily publish content without being required to undergo peer review, prove their qualifications, or provide backup documentation. While library books have more often than not been reviewed and edited by an editor, publishing company, etc., Internet sources cannot be causeless to be vetted by anyone other than their authors. Misinformation may be produced, reproduced, and posted immediately on about online platforms.[74]

Censorship accusations [edit]

Social media sites such equally Facebook and Twitter have plant themselves defending accusations of censorship for removing posts they have deemed to be misinformation. Social media censorship policies relying on government bureau-issued guidance to determine data validity have garnered criticism that such policies have the unintended effect of stifling dissent and criticism of authorities positions and policies.[75] Most recently, social media companies have faced criticism over allegedly prematurely censoring the give-and-take of the SARS-CoV 2 Lab Leak Hypothesis.[75] [76]

Other accusations of censorship announced to stem from attempts to prevent social media consumers from self-harm through the use of unproven COVID-19 treatments. For example, in July 2020, a video went viral showing Dr. Stella Immanuel challenge hydroxychloroquine was an effective cure for COVID-19. In the video, Immanuel suggested that there was no need for masks, school closures, or whatsoever kind of economic shut downwards; attesting that her declared cure was highly effective in treating those infected with the virus. The video was shared 600,000 times and received nearly xx million views on Facebook earlier information technology was taken down for violating community guidelines on spreading misinformation.[77] The video was as well taken down on Twitter overnight, but not before former president Donald Trump shared it to his page, which was followed past over 85 1000000 Twitter users. NIAID director Dr. Anthony Fauci and members of the Globe Wellness Organization (WHO) apace discredited the video, citing larger-scale studies of hydroxychloroquine showing it is not an effective treatment of COVID-19, and the FDA cautioned against using information technology to treat COVID-19 patients following bear witness of serious heart issues arising in patients who accept taken the drug.[78]

Another prominent instance of misinformation removal criticized by some as an example of censorship was the New York Post's report on the Hunter Biden laptops, which was used to promote the Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory. Social media companies quickly removed this report, and the Mail'southward Twitter account was temporarily suspended. Over 50 intelligence officials plant the disclosure of emails allegedly belonging to Joe Biden'due south son had all the "archetype earmarks of a Russian information operation".[79] Later show emerged that at to the lowest degree some of the laptop'southward contents were authentic.[80]

Mass media, trust, and transparency [edit]

Competition in news and media [edit]

Because news organizations and websites compete for viewers, there is a need for efficiency in releasing stories to the public. The news media landscape in the 1970s offered American consumers access to a limited, just often consistent selection of news offerings, whereas today consumers are confronted with an affluence of voices online. This growth of consumer pick when information technology comes to news media allows the consumer to choose a news source that may align with their biases, which consequently increases the likelihood that they are misinformed.[27] 47% of Americans reported social media as their main news source in 2017 equally opposed to traditional news sources.[81] News media companies ofttimes circulate stories 24 hours a mean solar day, and intermission the latest news in hopes of taking audition share from their competitors. News tin can also be produced at a stride that does not always allow for fact-checking, or for all of the facts to be collected or released to the media at one fourth dimension, letting readers or viewers insert their own opinions, and possibly leading to the spread of misinformation.[82]

Inaccurate data from media sources [edit]

A Gallup poll made public in 2016 found that only 32% of Americans trust the mass media "to report the news fully, accurately and fairly", the everyman number in the history of that poll.[83] An example of bad information from media sources that led to the spread of misinformation occurred in Nov 2005, when Chris Hansen on Dateline NBC claimed that constabulary enforcement officials estimate l,000 predators are online at whatever moment. After, the U.Southward. chaser full general at the time, Alberto Gonzales, repeated the claim. Notwithstanding, the number that Hansen used in his reporting had no backing. Hansen said he received the information from Dateline good Ken Lanning, but Lanning admitted that he made upwards the number 50,000 because there was no solid data on the number. Co-ordinate to Lanning, he used 50,000 considering it sounds like a real number, not too big and not too small, and referred to it as a "Goldilocks number". Reporter Carl Bialik says that the number 50,000 is used oftentimes in the media to estimate numbers when reporters are unsure of the exact data.[84]

The Novelty Hypothesis, which was created by Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy and Sinan Aral when they wanted to learn more than almost what attracts people to false news. What they discovered was that people are continued through emotion. In their study, they compared false tweets on Twitter that were shared by the total content tweeted, they specifically looked at the users and both the imitation and truthful information they shared. They learned that people are connected through their emotions, faux rumors suggested more than surprise and disgust which got people hooked and that the true rumors attracted more sadness, joy and trust. This study showed which emotions are more likely to crusade the spread of false news.[64]

Distrust [edit]

Misinformation has ofttimes been associated with the concept of fake news, which some scholars define as "fabricated data that mimics news media content in class but non in organizational procedure or intent."[16] Intentional misinformation, called disinformation, has get normalized in politics and topics of peachy importance to the public, such as climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic. Intentional misinformation has caused irreversible damage to public agreement and trust.[85] Egelhofer et al. argued that the media'south broad adoption of the term "simulated news" has served to normalize this concept and assistance to stabilize the utilise of this buzzword in our everyday language (2021).[86] Goldstein (2021) discussed the need for government agencies and organizations to increase transparency of their practices or services by using social media. Companies tin can then use the platforms offered by social media and bring along full transparency to the public. If used in strategic ways, social media can offer an bureau or agenda (ex: political campaigns or vaccines) a style to connect with the public and offer a place for people to track news and developments.

Despite many popular examples existence from the US, misinformation is prevalent worldwide. In the United Kingdom, many people followed and believed a conspiracy theory that Coronavirus was linked to the 5G network,[87] a popular thought that arose from a series of hashtags on Twitter.

Misinformation tin also be used to deflect accountability. For example, Syrian arab republic'due south repeated use of chemic weapons was the discipline of a disinformation campaign intended to prevent accountability [cite Steward, M. (2021).[87] In his paper Defending Weapons Inspections from the Effects of Disinformation, Stewart shows how disinformation was used to conceal and purposely misinform the public near Syria'due south violations of international law. The intention was to create plausible deniability of the violations, making word of possible violations to be regarded as untruthful rumors. Considering the disinformation campaigns have been so effective and normalized, the opposing side has also started relying on disinformation to prevent repercussions for unfavorable behavior from those pushing a counter narrative.

Co-ordinate to Melanie Freeze (Freeze et al., 2020), in most cases the damage of misinformation can exist irreparable.[87] Freeze explored whether people tin retrieve an effect accurately when presented with misinformation after the event occurred. Findings showed that an individual's recollection of political events could be altered when presented with misinformation most the event. This study also found that if one is able to place warning signs of misinformation, they still have a difficult fourth dimension retaining the pieces of data which are accurate vs inaccurate. Furthermore, their results showed that people can completely discard accurate information if they incorrectly deem a news source as "fake news" or untrustworthy and potentially disregard completely credible information. Alyt Damstra (Damstra et al., 2021) states that misinformation has been around since the institution of press, thus leaving piddling room to wonder how it has been normalized today.[88]

Alexander Lanoszka (2019)[89] argued that simulated news does not have to be looked at equally an unwinnable state of war. Misinformation tin can create a sense of societal anarchy and anarchy. With deep mistrust, no single idea can successfully motility frontwards. With the existence of malicious efforts to misinform, desired progress may rely on trust in people and their processes.

Misinformation was a major talking betoken during the 2016 American Presidential Election with claims of social media sites assuasive "fake news" to be spread.[29] It has been found that exposure to misinformation is associated with an overall rise in political trust by those siding with the government in power or those who self-define as politically moderate.[xc] Social media became polarized and political during the 2020 The states Presidential Ballot, with some arguing that misinformation about COVID-19 had been circulating, creating skepticism of topics such as vaccines and figures such as Dr. Fauci. Others argued that platforms such equally Facebook had been unconstitutionally censoring conservative voices, spreading misinformation to persuade voters.[29]

Polarization on social media platforms has caused people to question the source of their information. Skepticism in news platforms created a large distrust of the news media. Oft, misinformation is blended to seem true.[39] Misinformation does not simply imply false information. Social media platforms can be an easy place to skew and manipulate facts to bear witness a different view on a topic, often trying to paint a bad picture show of events.[91] [37]

Affect [edit]

Misinformation can affect all aspects of life. Allcott, Gentzkow, and Yu concur that the diffusion of misinformation through social media is a potential threat to republic and broader society. The effects of misinformation can lead to reject of accurateness of data every bit well as event details.[92] When eavesdropping on conversations, 1 can gather facts that may not ever exist true, or the receiver may hear the message incorrectly and spread the information to others. On the Net, one tin read content that is stated to be factual but that may not accept been checked or may be erroneous. In the news, companies may emphasize the speed at which they receive and ship data only may non e'er be correct in the facts. These developments contribute to the mode misinformation may continue to complicate the public's understanding of bug and to serve every bit a source for belief and attitude formation.[93]

In regards to politics, some view existence a misinformed citizen as worse than being an uninformed citizen. Misinformed citizens tin state their beliefs and opinions with confidence and thus touch on elections and policies. This type of misinformation occurs when a speaker appears "authoritative and legitimate", while too spreading misinformation. When information is presented as vague, ambiguous, sarcastic, or partial, receivers are forced to slice the information together and brand assumptions about what is right.[94] Misinformation has the power to sway public elections and referendums if it gains enough momentum. Leading up to the 2016 Uk European Spousal relationship membership referendum, for example, a figure widely circulated by the Vote Leave campaign claimed the UK would salvage £350 million a week by leaving the EU, and that the money would be redistributed to the British National Health Service. This was after accounted a "clear misuse of official statistics" past the Great britain statistics authority. The advert infamously shown on the side of London'south coach busses did not take into account the UK'south upkeep rebate, and the thought that 100% of the money saved would go to the NHS was unrealistic. A poll published in 2016 by Ipsos MORI constitute that most one-half of the British public believed this misinformation to exist true.[95] Fifty-fifty when information is proven to be misinformation, it may continue to shape attitudes towards a given topic,[83] meaning information technology has the power to swing political decisions if it gains plenty traction. A written report conducted past Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy and Sinan Aral looked at Twitter data including 126,000 posts spread by 3 million people over four.five meg times. They found that political news traveled faster than any other type of information. They institute that false news about politics reached more than xx,000 people three times faster than all other types of false news.[64]

Aside from political propaganda, misinformation can besides exist employed in industrial propaganda. Using tools such as advertising, a company can undermine reliable evidence or influence belief through a concerted misinformation campaign. For instance, tobacco companies employed misinformation in the second half of the twentieth century to diminish the reliability of studies that demonstrated the link between smoking and lung cancer.[96]

In the medical field, misinformation can immediately lead to life endangerment as seen in the case of the public's negative perception towards vaccines or the use of herbs instead of medicines to treat diseases.[97] In regards to the COVID-xix pandemic, the spread of misinformation has proven to crusade defoliation as well equally negative emotions such equally anxiety and fright.[98] [99] Misinformation regarding proper safety measures for the prevention of the virus that go against information from legitimate institutions similar the World Wellness Organization can also pb to inadequate protection and peradventure place individuals at take a chance for exposure.[98] [100]

Some scholars and activists are heading movements to eliminate the mis/disinformation and information pollution in the digital earth. 1 theory, "information environmentalism," has go a curriculum in some universities and colleges.[101] [102]

See also [edit]

  • List of common misconceptions
  • List of fact-checking websites
  • List of fake news websites
  • Listing of satirical news websites
  • Alarmism
  • Big lie
  • Character assassination
    • Defamation (as well known equally "slander")
  • Counter Misinformation Team
  • Euromyth
  • Factoid
  • Fallacy
    • List of fallacies
  • Flat globe
  • Gossip
  • Junk science
  • Persuasion
  • Pseudoscience
  • Quotation
  • Rumor
  • Sensationalism
  • Social applied science (in political science and cybercrime)

References [edit]

  1. ^ Merriam-Webster Dictionary (19 August 2020). "Misinformation". Retrieved 19 Baronial 2020.
  2. ^ Merriam-Webster Dictionary (nineteen August 2020). "Disinformation". Merriam-Webster . Retrieved xix August 2020.
  3. ^ Woolley, Samuel C.; Howard, Philip N. (2016). "Political Communication, Computational Propaganda, and Autonomous Agents". International Journal of Communication. 10: 4882–4890. Archived from the original on 2019-10-22. Retrieved 2019-10-22 .
  4. ^ Caramancion, Kevin Matthe (March 2020). "An Exploration of Disinformation as a Cybersecurity Threat". 2020 3rd International Conference on Information and Computer Technologies (ICICT). IEEE: 440–444. doi:10.1109/icict50521.2020.00076. ISBN978-1-7281-7283-v. S2CID 218651389.
  5. ^ Merriam-Webster Dictionary - rumor
  6. ^ Ecker, Ullrich Thousand.H.; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Cheung, Candy South.C.; Maybery, Murray T. (Nov 2015). "He did it! She did information technology! No, she did not! Multiple causal explanations and the connected influence of misinformation" (PDF). Periodical of Retention and Language. 85: 101–115. doi:x.1016/j.jml.2015.09.002.
  7. ^ a b Aral, Sinan (2020). The hype machine : how social media disrupts our elections, our economy, and our wellness--and how we must adapt (Showtime ed.). New York. ISBN978-0-525-57451-four. OCLC 1155486056.
  8. ^ Lewandowsky, Stephan; Ecker, Ullrich K. H.; Seifert, Colleen Thousand.; Schwarz, Norbert; Cook, John (2012). "Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 13 (3): 106–131. doi:x.1177/1529100612451018. ISSN 1529-1006. JSTOR 23484653. PMID 26173286. S2CID 42633.
  9. ^ "The True History of False News". The New York Review of Books. 2017-02-13. Archived from the original on 2019-02-05. Retrieved 2019-02-24 .
  10. ^ Renee DiResta; Tobias Rose-Stockwell. "How to Stop Misinformation Before Information technology Gets Shared". Wired.
  11. ^ "A short guide to the history of 'faux news' and disinformation". International Center for Journalists. Archived from the original on 2019-02-25. Retrieved 2019-02-24 .
  12. ^ Mintz, Anne. "The Misinformation Superhighway?". PBS. Archived from the original on 2 April 2013. Retrieved 26 Feb 2013.
  13. ^ Jain, Suchita; Sharma, Vanya; Kaushal, Rishabh (September 2016). "Towards automated real-time detection of misinformation on Twitter". 2016 International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI). IEEE Conference Publication. pp. 2015–2020. doi:10.1109/ICACCI.2016.7732347. ISBN978-one-5090-2029-4. S2CID 17767475.
  14. ^ Libicki, Martin (2007). Conquest in Cyberspace: National Security and Information Warfare . New York: Cambridge Academy Press. pp. 51–55. ISBN978-0521871600.
  15. ^ Khan, M. Laeeq; Idris, Ika Karlina (2019-02-11). "Recognise misinformation and verify before sharing: a reasoned action and information literacy perspective". Behaviour & It. 38 (12): 1194–1212. doi:10.1080/0144929x.2019.1578828. ISSN 0144-929X. S2CID 86681742.
  16. ^ a b c Lazer, David Grand. J.; Baum, Matthew A.; Benkler, Yochai; Berinsky, Adam J.; Greenhill, Kelly K.; Menczer, Filippo; Metzger, Miriam J.; Nyhan, Brendan; Pennycook, Gordon; Rothschild, David; Schudson, Michael; Sloman, Steven A.; Sunstein, Cass R.; Thorson, Emily A.; Watts, Duncan J.; Zittrain, Jonathan Fifty. (2018). "The scientific discipline of fake news". Science. 359 (6380): 1094–1096. Bibcode:2018Sci...359.1094L. doi:x.1126/science.aao2998. PMID 29590025. S2CID 4410672.
  17. ^ Vraga, Emily K.; Bode, Leticia (December 2017). "Leveraging Institutions, Educators, and Networks to Correct Misinformation: A Commentary on Lewandosky, Ecker, and Cook". Journal of Applied Research in Retention and Cognition. 6 (four): 382–388. doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.09.008. ISSN 2211-3681.
  18. ^ Caramancion, Kevin Matthe (September 2020). "Understanding the Impact of Contextual Clues in Misinformation Detection". 2020 IEEE International IOT, Electronics and Mechatronics Conference (IEMTRONICS): 1–6. doi:10.1109/IEMTRONICS51293.2020.9216394. ISBN978-1-7281-9615-ii. S2CID 222297695.
  19. ^ a b c Scheufele, Dietram; Krause, Nicole (April xvi, 2019). "Science audiences, misinformation, and faux news". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences. 116.
  20. ^ a b Ecker, Ullrich K. H.; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Chadwick, Matthew (2020-04-22). "Can Corrections Spread Misinformation to New Audiences? Testing for the Elusive Familiarity Backfire Effect". Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications. 5 (one): 41. doi:10.31219/osf.io/et4p3. PMC7447737. PMID 32844338.
  21. ^ Lewandowsky, Stephan; Ecker, Ullrich Chiliad. H.; Seifert, Colleen M.; Schwarz, Norbert; Cook, John (2012). "Misinformation and Its Correction: Connected Influence and Successful Debiasing". Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 13 (3): 106–131. doi:10.1177/1529100612451018. JSTOR 23484653. PMID 26173286. S2CID 42633.
  22. ^ Busselle, Rick (2017), "Schema Theory and Mental Models", The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, American Cancer Society, pp. 1–8, doi:10.1002/9781118783764.wbieme0079, ISBN978-1-118-78376-4 , retrieved 2021-03-28
  23. ^ a b Plaza, Mateusz; Paladino, Lorenzo (2019). "The apply of distributed consensus algorithms to curtail the spread of medical misinformation". International Periodical of Bookish Medicine. 5 (2): 93–96. doi:10.4103/IJAM.IJAM_47_19. S2CID 201803407.
  24. ^ "Supplemental Material for The Role of Familiarity in Correcting Inaccurate Information". Periodical of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Noesis. 2017. doi:10.1037/xlm0000422.supp. ISSN 0278-7393.
  25. ^ Walter, Nathan; Tukachinsky, Riva (2019-06-22). "A Meta-Analytic Test of the Continued Influence of Misinformation in the Confront of Correction: How Powerful Is It, Why Does It Happen, and How to Finish It?". Advice Research. 47 (2): 155–177. doi:10.1177/0093650219854600. ISSN 0093-6502. S2CID 197731687.
  26. ^ Cook, John (May–June 2020). "Using Humor And Games To Counter Scientific discipline Misinformation". Skeptical Inquirer. Vol. 44, no. 3. Amherst, New York: Center for Inquiry. pp. 38–41. Archived from the original on 31 December 2020. Retrieved 31 December 2020.
  27. ^ a b c Lewandowsky, Stephan; Ecker, Ullrich K.H.; Cook, John (December 2017). "Across Misinformation: Understanding and Coping with the "Post-Truth" Era". Periodical of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition. vi (4): 353–369. doi:10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008. hdl:1983/1b4da4f3-009d-4287-8e45-a0a1d7b688f7. ISSN 2211-3681.
  28. ^ a b c d e "Facebook exposed over its handling of COVID - ProQuest". www.proquest.com. ProQuest 2553642687. Retrieved 2021-ten-07 .
  29. ^ a b c "When Misinformation is Misinformation - ProQuest". www.proquest.com. ProQuest 2477885938. Retrieved 2021-10-10 .
  30. ^ "Ask FactCheck". www.factcheck.org. Archived from the original on 2016-03-31. Retrieved 2016-03-31 .
  31. ^ a b Fernandez, Miriam; Alani, Harith (2018). "Online Misinformation" (PDF). Companion of the Spider web Conference 2018 on the Web Briefing 2018 – WWW '18. New York: ACM Press: 595–602. doi:10.1145/3184558.3188730. ISBN978-1-4503-5640-4. S2CID 13799324. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-04-xi. Retrieved 2020-02-thirteen .
  32. ^ Zhang, Chaowei; Gupta, Ashish; Kauten, Christian; Deokar, Amit V.; Qin, Xiao (December 2019). "Detecting fake news for reducing misinformation risks using analytics approaches". European Journal of Operational Enquiry. 279 (three): 1036–1052. doi:ten.1016/j.ejor.2019.06.022. ISSN 0377-2217. S2CID 197492100.
  33. ^ Calvert, Philip (December 2002). "Spider web of Deception: Misinformation on the Internet". The Electronic Library. 20 (6): 521. doi:10.1108/el.2002.20.six.521.7. ISSN 0264-0473.
  34. ^ Conspiracy theories accept long lurked in the groundwork of American history, said Dustin Carnahan, a Michigan State University professor who studies political misinformation: Conspiracy theories paint fraudulent reality of Jan. 6 riot, By DAVID KLEPPER, AP news, 1° Jan. 2022.
  35. ^ Marwick, Alice E. (2013-01-31), "Online Identity", in John Hartley; Jean Burgess; Axel Bruns (eds.), A Companion to New Media Dynamics, Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 355–364, doi:10.1002/9781118321607.ch23, ISBN978-i-118-32160-7
  36. ^ Verma, Nitin; Fleischmann, Kenneth R.; Koltai, Kolina Due south. (2017). "Human values and trust in scientific journals, the mainstream media and fake news". Proceedings of the Clan for Information Science and Engineering. 54 (one): 426–435. doi:10.1002/pra2.2017.14505401046. ISSN 2373-9231. S2CID 51958978.
  37. ^ a b Chen, Xinran; Sin, Sei-Ching Joanna (2013). "'Misinformation? What of it?' Motivations and individual differences in misinformation sharing on social media". Proceedings of the American Order for Informatics and Technology. 50 (1): one–iv. doi:10.1002/run across.14505001102. ISSN 1550-8390.
  38. ^ "Literature Review: Echo chambers, filter bubbles and polarization" (PDF) . Retrieved 21 February 2022.
  39. ^ a b "Preview unavailable - ProQuest". www.proquest.com. ProQuest 1355300828. Retrieved 2021-x-07 .
  40. ^ Beware online "filter bubbles" | Eli Pariser , retrieved 2022-02-09
  41. ^ a b "The online information environment" (PDF) . Retrieved 21 February 2022.
  42. ^ Yee, Amy. "The state inoculating against disinformation". BBC . Retrieved 21 Feb 2022.
  43. ^ "Regal Society cautions confronting censorship of scientific misinformation online". The Regal Order . Retrieved 12 February 2022.
  44. ^ Vosoughi, Soroush; Roy, Deb; Aral, Sinan (2018-03-09). "The spread of true and false news online" (PDF). Science. 359 (6380): 1146–1151. Bibcode:2018Sci...359.1146V. doi:10.1126/science.aap9559. PMID 29590045. S2CID 4549072. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-04-29. Retrieved 2019-08-21 .
  45. ^ Tucker, Joshua A.; Guess, Andrew; Barbera, Pablo; Vaccari, Cristian; Siegel, Alexandra; Sanovich, Sergey; Stukal, Denis; Nyhan, Brendan. "Social Media, Political Polarization, and Political Disinformation: A Review of the Scientific Literature". Hewlett Foundation White Paper. Archived from the original on 2019-03-06. Retrieved 2019-03-05 .
  46. ^ Machado, Caio; Kira, Beatriz; Narayanan, Vidya; Kollanyi, Bence; Howard, Philip (2019). "A Study of Misinformation in WhatsApp groups with a focus on the Brazilian Presidential Elections". Companion Proceedings of the 2019 Earth Wide Web Conference on – WWW 'xix. New York: ACM Press: 1013–1019. doi:10.1145/3308560.3316738. ISBN978-1450366755. S2CID 153314118.
  47. ^ a b Chen, Xinran; Sin, Sei-Ching Joanna; Theng, Yin-Leng; Lee, Chei Sian (September 2015). "Why Students Share Misinformation on Social Media: Motivation, Gender, and Study-level Differences". The Journal of Bookish Librarianship. 41 (5): 583–592. doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2015.07.003.
  48. ^ Caramancion, Kevin Matthe (2021), "The Role of Information Organization and Knowledge Structuring in Combatting Misinformation: A Literary Assay", Computational Information and Social Networks, Lecture Notes in Calculator Science, Cham: Springer International Publishing, vol. 13116, pp. 319–329, doi:10.1007/978-iii-030-91434-9_28, ISBN978-3-030-91433-2, S2CID 244890285, retrieved 2021-12-19
  49. ^ Starbird, Kate; Dailey, Dharma; Mohamed, Owla; Lee, Gina; Spiro, Emma (2018). "Engage Early, Right More: How Journalists Participate in Simulated Rumors Online during Crisis Events". Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Briefing on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18). doi:ten.1145/3173574.3173679. S2CID 5046314. Retrieved 2019-02-24 .
  50. ^ Arif, Ahmer; Robinson, John; Stanck, Stephanie; Fichet, Elodie; Townsend, Paul; Worku, Zena; Starbird, Kate (2017). "A Closer Expect at the Cocky-Correcting Crowd: Examining Corrections in Online Rumors" (PDF). Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Briefing on Computer Supported Cooperative Piece of work and Social Calculating (CSCW '17): 155–169. doi:ten.1145/2998181.2998294. ISBN978-1450343350. S2CID 15167363. Archived (PDF) from the original on 26 Feb 2019. Retrieved 25 February 2019.
  51. ^ Allcott, Hunt; Gentzkow, Matthew; Yu, Chuan (Apr 2019). "Trends in the improvidence of misinformation on social media". Inquiry & Politics. six (2): 205316801984855. doi:10.1177/2053168019848554. ISSN 2053-1680. S2CID 52291737.
  52. ^ a b Swire-Thompson, Briony; Lazer, David (2020). "Public Health and Online Misinformation: Challenges and Recommendations". Annual Review of Public Wellness. 41: 433–451. doi:x.1146/annurev-publhealth-040119-094127. PMID 31874069.
  53. ^ Dwoskin, Elizabeth. "Misinformation on Facebook got six times more than clicks than factual news during the 2020 election, study says". The Washington Post. {{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-condition (link)
  54. ^ Messerole, Chris (2018-05-09). "How misinformation spreads on social media – And what to exercise about information technology". Brookings Institution. Archived from the original on 25 February 2019. Retrieved 24 February 2019.
  55. ^ Benkler, Y. (2017). "Written report: Breitbart-led rightwing media ecosystem contradistinct broader media calendar". Archived from the original on iv June 2018. Retrieved 8 June 2018.
  56. ^ Allcott, Hunt (Oct 2018). "Trends in the Improvidence of Misinformation on Social Media" (PDF). Stanford Education. arXiv:1809.05901. Bibcode:2018arXiv180905901A. Archived (PDF) from the original on 2019-07-28. Retrieved 2019-05-10 .
  57. ^ Krause, Nicole M.; Scheufele, Dietram A. (2019-04-xvi). "Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news". Proceedings of the National University of Sciences. 116 (16): 7662–7669. doi:10.1073/pnas.1805871115. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC6475373. PMID 30642953.
  58. ^ Allcott, Hunt; Gentzkow, Matthew; Yu, Chuan (2019-04-01). "Trends in the diffusion of misinformation on social media". Research & Politics. half-dozen (ii): 2053168019848554. doi:10.1177/2053168019848554. ISSN 2053-1680. S2CID 52291737.
  59. ^ Shin, Jieun; Jian, Lian; Driscoll, Kevin; Bar, François (June 2018). "The diffusion of misinformation on social media: Temporal pattern, message, and source". Computers in Human Behavior. 83: 278–287. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.008. ISSN 0747-5632. S2CID 41956979.
  60. ^ "Amazon to suspend Parler after deadly Capitol Colina riot". www.aljazeera.com . Retrieved 2022-03-07 .
  61. ^ a b Chen, Xinran; Sin, Sei-Ching Joanna; Theng, Yin-Leng; Lee, Chei Sian (2015). "Why Do Social Media Users Share Misinformation?". Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CE on Joint Conference on Digital Libraries – JCDL '15. New York: ACM Press: 111–114. doi:10.1145/2756406.2756941. ISBN978-1-4503-3594-ii. S2CID 15983217.
  62. ^ Gabbert, Fiona; Memon, Amina; Allan, Kevin; Wright, Daniel B. (September 2004). "Say it to my face: Examining the furnishings of socially encountered misinformation" (PDF). Legal and Criminological Psychology. nine (2): 215–227. doi:10.1348/1355325041719428. ISSN 1355-3259.
  63. ^ a b c Aral, Sinan (2020). The hype machine : how social media disrupts our elections, our economic system, and our health--and how we must arrange (Start ed.). New York. ISBN978-0-525-57451-four. OCLC 1155486056.
  64. ^ "Revealed: a quarter of all tweets about climate crisis produced by bots". The Guardian. 2020-02-21. Retrieved 2021-04-twenty .
  65. ^ Milman, Oliver (2020-02-21). "Revealed: quarter of all tweets near climate crunch produced by bots". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on 2020-02-22. Retrieved 2020-02-23 .
  66. ^ Massey, Douglas South.; Iyengar, Shanto (2019-04-xvi). "Scientific advice in a mail service-truth order". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 116 (16): 7656–7661. doi:ten.1073/pnas.1805868115. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC6475392. PMID 30478050.
  67. ^ Allcott, Hunt; Gentzkow, Matthew; Yu, Chuan (2019-04-01). "Trends in the diffusion of misinformation on social media". Research & Politics. 6 (2): 2053168019848554. doi:ten.1177/2053168019848554. ISSN 2053-1680.
  68. ^ Thai, My T.; Wu, Weili; Xiong, Hui (2016-12-01). Big Information in Complex and Social Networks. CRC Printing. ISBN978-1-315-39669-nine.
  69. ^ Bode, Leticia; Vraga, Emily K. (2018-09-02). "See Something, Say Something: Correction of Global Wellness Misinformation on Social Media". Health Communication. 33 (9): 1131–1140. doi:ten.1080/10410236.2017.1331312. ISSN 1041-0236. PMID 28622038. S2CID 205698884.
  70. ^ Shaffer, David Williamson; Collier, Wesley; Ruis, A. R. (2016). "A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: Analysing the structural connections in cognitive, social and interaction data" (PDF). Journal of Learning Analytics. 3 (3): ix–45. doi:10.18608/jla.2016.33.three. Retrieved 31 January 2022.
  71. ^ a b Cailin, O'Connor; Weatherall, James Owen (2019). The Misinformation Historic period: How False Beliefs Spread. New Haven, CT, U.s.a.: Yale University Printing. ISBN9780300234015 . Retrieved 31 January 2022.
  72. ^ Valković, Martina (Nov 2020). "Review of "The Misinformation Age: How False Beliefs Spread."". Philosophy in Review. 40 (4). doi:10.7202/1074030ar. S2CID 229478320. Retrieved 31 January 2022.
  73. ^ Stapleton, Paul (2003). "Assessing the quality and bias of spider web-based sources: implications for academic writing". Journal of English language for Academic Purposes. 2 (iii): 229–245. doi:10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00026-2.
  74. ^ a b "Facebook's Lab-Leak Well-nigh-Confront". WSJ. {{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  75. ^ "Covid origin: Why the Wuhan lab-leak theory is being taken seriously". BBC News. 27 May 2021. {{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  76. ^ "Hydroxychloroquine: Why a video promoted by Trump was pulled on social media". BBC News. 2020-07-28. Retrieved 2021-11-24 .
  77. ^ "Stella Immanuel - the doctor behind unproven coronavirus cure claim". BBC News. 2020-07-29. Retrieved 2020-11-23 .
  78. ^ Bertrand, Natasha (Oct xix, 2020). "Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say". Politico. Archived from the original on Oct 20, 2020. Retrieved October 20, 2020.
  79. ^ Lizza, Ryan (September 21, 2021). "Politico Playbook: Double Problem for Biden". Politico.
  80. ^ Shearer, Elisa; Gottfried, Jeffrey (2017-09-07). "News Use Beyond Social Media Platforms 2017". Pew Inquiry Heart'due south Journalism Project . Retrieved 2021-03-28 .
  81. ^ Croteau, David; Hoynes, William; Milan, Stefania. "Media Technology" (PDF). Media Society: Industries, Images, and Audiences. pp. 285–321. Archived (PDF) from the original on Jan 2, 2013. Retrieved March 21, 2013.
  82. ^ a b Marwick, Alice; Lewis, Rebecca (2017). Media Manipulation and Disinformation Online. New York: Data & Order Enquiry Establish. pp. 40–45.
  83. ^ Gladstone, Brooke (2012). The Influencing Machine. New York: Westward. W. Norton & Visitor. pp. 49–51. ISBN978-0393342468.
  84. ^ "Misinformation - ProQuest". www.proquest.com. ProQuest 2486203133. Retrieved 2021-12-16 .
  85. ^ Egelhofer, Jana Laura; Aaldering, Loes; Eberl, Jakob-Moritz; Galyga, Sebastian; Lecheler, Sophie (2020-03-30). "From Novelty to Normalization? How Journalists Use the Term "Fake News" in their Reporting". Journalism Studies. 21 (10): 1323–1343. doi:ten.1080/1461670x.2020.1745667. ISSN 1461-670X. S2CID 216189313.
  86. ^ a b c Stewart, Mallory (2021). "Defending Weapons Inspections from the Effects of Disinformation". AJIL Unbound. 115: 106–110. doi:10.1017/aju.2021.four. ISSN 2398-7723. S2CID 232070073.
  87. ^ Damstra, Alyt; Boomgaarden, Hajo K.; Broda, Elena; Lindgren, Elina; Strömbäck, Jesper; Tsfati, Yariv; Vliegenthart, Rens (2021-09-29). "What Does Fake Look Similar? A Review of the Literature on Intentional Deception in the News and on Social Media". Journalism Studies. 22 (fourteen): 1947–1963. doi:10.1080/1461670x.2021.1979423. ISSN 1461-670X. S2CID 244253422.
  88. ^ Lanoszka, Alexander (June 2019). "Disinformation in international politics". European Periodical of International Security. 4 (2): 227–248. doi:x.1017/eis.2019.vi. ISSN 2057-5637. S2CID 211312944.
  89. ^ Ognyanova, Katherine; Lazer, David; Robertson, Ronald E.; Wilson, Christo (2020-06-02). "Misinformation in activity: Imitation news exposure is linked to lower trust in media, higher trust in government when your side is in power". Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. doi:ten.37016/mr-2020-024. S2CID 219904597.
  90. ^ "Clarifying misinformation Clarifying - ProQuest". www.proquest.com. ProQuest 1771695334. Retrieved 2021-10-10 .
  91. ^ Bodner, Glen Eastward.; Musch, Elisabeth; Azad, Tanjeem (2009). "Reevaluating the potency of the retention conformity upshot". Memory & Cognition. 37 (eight): 1069–1076. doi:10.3758/mc.37.eight.1069. ISSN 0090-502X. PMID 19933452.
  92. ^ Southwell, Brian G.; Thorson, Emily A.; Sheble, Laura (2018). Misinformation and Mass Audiences. University of Texas Press. ISBN978-1477314586.
  93. ^ Barker, David (2002). Rushed to Sentence: Talk Radio, Persuasion, and American Political Behavior. New York: Columbia Academy Press. pp. 106–109.
  94. ^ "The misinformation that was told about Brexit during and after the referendum". The Independent. 2018-07-27. Retrieved 2020-eleven-23 .
  95. ^ O'Connor, Cailin; Weatherall, James Owen (2019). The Misinformation Age: How False Beliefs Spread . New Haven: Yale Academy Printing. pp. 10. ISBN978-0300234015.
  96. ^ Sinha, P.; Shaikh, South.; Sidharth, A. (2019). India Misinformed: The Truthful Story. Harper Collins. ISBN978-9353028381.
  97. ^ a b Bratu, Sofia (May 24, 2020). "The Faux News Folklore of COVID-19 Pandemic Fear: Dangerously Inaccurate Beliefs, Emotional Contamination, and Conspiracy Ideation". Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations. 19: 128–134. doi:ten.22381/LPI19202010.
  98. ^ Gayathri Vaidyanathan (22 July 2020). "News Feature: Finding a vaccine for misinformation". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 117 (32): 18902–18905. Bibcode:2020PNAS..11718902V. doi:10.1073/PNAS.2013249117. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC7431032. PMID 32699146. Wikidata Q97652640.
  99. ^ "Misinformation on coronavirus is proving highly contagious". AP NEWS. 2020-07-29. Retrieved 2020-11-23 .
  100. ^ "Info-Environmentalism: An Introduction". Archived from the original on 2018-07-03. Retrieved 2018-09-28 .
  101. ^ "Information Environmentalism". Digital Learning and Research (DLINQ). 2017-12-21. Archived from the original on 2018-09-28. Retrieved 2018-09-28 .

Further reading [edit]

  • Machado, Caio; Kira, Beatriz; Narayanan, Vidya; Kollanyi, Bence; Howard, Philip (2019). "A Study of Misinformation in WhatsApp groups with a focus on the Brazilian Presidential Elections". Companion Proceedings of the 2019 World Wide Web Conference on – World wide web '19. New York: ACM Press: 1013–1019. doi:10.1145/3308560.3316738. ISBN978-1450366755. S2CID 153314118.
  • Allcott, H.; Gentzkow, M. (2017). "Social Media and Imitation News in the 2016 Election". Journal of Economic Perspectives. 31 (2): 211–236. doi:ten.1257/jep.31.two.211. S2CID 32730475.
  • Baillargeon, Normand (4 January 2008). A brusque grade in intellectual self-defense force. Seven Stories Press. ISBN 978-1-58322-765-7. Retrieved 22 June 2011.
  • Bakir, V.; McStay, A. (2017). "Faux News and The Economy of Emotions: Bug, causes, solutions". Digital Journalism. 6: 154–175. doi:10.1080/21670811.2017.1345645. S2CID 157153522.
  • Christopher Cerf, and Victor Navasky, The Experts Speak: The Definitive Compendium of Authoritative Misinformation, Pantheon Books, 1984.
  • Cook, John; Stephan Lewandowsky; Ullrich One thousand. H. Ecker (2017-05-05). "Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence". PLOS One. 12 (five): e0175799. Bibcode:2017PLoSO..1275799C. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0175799. PMC5419564. PMID 28475576.
  • Helfand, David J., A Survival Guide to the Misinformation Age: Scientific Habits of Mind. Columbia University Press, 2016. ISBN 978-0231541022
  • Christopher Murphy (2005). Competitive Intelligence: Gathering, Analysing And Putting It to Work. Gower Publishing, Ltd.. pp. 186–189. ISBN 0-566-08537-2. A instance written report of misinformation arising from unproblematic error
  • O'Connor, Cailin, and James Owen Weatherall, "Why We Trust Lies: The nearly constructive misinformation starts with seeds of truth", Scientific American, vol. 321, no. 3 (September 2019), pp. 54–61.
  • O'Connor, Cailin, and James Owen Weatherall, The Misinformation Age; How False Beliefs Spread. Yale Academy Press, 2019. ISBN 978-0300241006
  • Persily, Nathaniel, and Joshua A. Tucker, eds. Social Media and Democracy: The State of the Field and Prospects for Reform. Cambridge University Printing, 2020. ISBN 978-1108858779
  • Jürg Strässler (1982). Idioms in English: A Businesslike Analysis. Gunter Narr Verlag. pp. 43–44. ISBN 3-87808-971-6.

External links [edit]

  • Comic: Simulated News Can Be Deadly. Here's How To Spot It (audio tutorial, graphic tutorial)

blackwoodfelf1976.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misinformation

0 Response to "what is one way to avoid being misled by journalism reports on scientific research?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel