skip to main content
research-article
Open Access

Fakey: A Game Intervention to Improve News Literacy on Social Media

Published:22 April 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We designed and developed Fakey, a game to improve news literacy and reduce misinformation spread by emulating a social media feed. We analyzed player interactions with articles in the feed collected over 19 months within a real-world deployment of the game. We found that Fakey is effective in priming players to be suspicious of articles from questionable sources. Players who interact with more articles in the game enhance their skills in spotting mainstream content, thus confirming the utility of Fakey for improving news literacy. Semi-structured interviews with those who played the game revealed that players find it simple, fun, and educational. The principles and mechanisms used by Fakey can inform the design of social media functionality to help people distinguish between credible and questionable content in their news feeds.

References

  1. Michelle A. Amazeen, Emily Thorson, Ashley Muddiman, and Lucas Graves. 2018. Correcting political and consumer Misperceptions: The efectiveness and efects of rating scale versus contextual correction formats. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95, 1 (2018), 28--48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016678186Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Ahmer Arif, Leo Graiden Stewart, and Kate Starbird. 2018. Acting the part: Examining information operations within #BlackLivesMatter discourse. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2, CSCW, Article 20 (Nov. 2018), 27 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3274289Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Patricia Aufderheide. 1993. Media literacy. A report of the National Leadership Conference on Media Literacy. Education Resources Information Center ED365294 (1993), 44 pages. https://fles.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED365294.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Mihai Avram, Nicholas Micallef, Sameer Patil, and Filippo Menczer. 2020. Exposure to social engagement metrics increases vulnerability to misinformation. The Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 1, 5 (2020), 1--11. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-033Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Melisa Basol, Jon Roozenbeek, and Sander van der Linden. 2020. Good news about bad news: Gamifed inoculation boosts confdence and cognitive immunity against fake news. Journal ofcognition 3, 1 (2020), 1--9. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.91Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Md. Momen Bhuiyan, Kexin Zhang, Kelsey Vick, Michael A. Horning, and Tanushree Mitra. 2018. FeedRefect: A tool for nudging users to assess news credibility on Twitter. In Companion of the 2018 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Jersey City, NJ, USA) (CSCW '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 205--208. https://doi.org/10.1145/3272973.3274056Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Leticia Bode and Emily K. Vraga. 2015. In related news, that was wrong: The correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media. Journal of Communication 65, 4 (Jun 2015), 619--638. https://doi.org/10. 1111/jcom.12166Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Alexandre Bovet and Hernán A. Makse. 2019. Infuence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Nature Communications 10, 1 (2019), 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07761-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Ceren Budak, Divyakant Agrawal, and Amr El Abbadi. 2011. Limiting the spread of misinformation in social networks. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on World Wide Web (Hyderabad, India) (WWW '11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 665--674. https://doi.org/10.1145/1963405.1963499Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Robert Chesney and Danielle Citron. 2019. Deepfakes and the new disinformation war: The coming age of post-truth geopolitics. Foreign Afairs 98, 1 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Katherine Clayton, Spencer Blair, Jonathan A. Busam, Samuel Forstner, John Glance, Guy Green, Anna Kawata, Akhila Kovvuri, Jonathan Martin, Evan Morgan, Morgan Sandhu, Rachel Sang, Rachel Scholz-Bright, Austin T. Welch, Andrew G. Wolf, Amanda Zhou, and Brendan Nyhan. 2020. Real solutions for fake news? Measuring the efectiveness of general warnings and fact-check tags in reducing belief in false stories on social media. Political Behavior 42, 4 (2020), 1073--1095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09533-0Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Michela Del Vicario, Alessandro Bessi, Fabiana Zollo, Fabio Petroni, Antonio Scala, Guido Caldarelli, H. Eugene Stanley, and Walter Quattrociocchi. 2016. The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 113, 3 (2016), 554--559. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517441113Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Nicholas Dias, Gordon Pennycook, and David G. Rand. 2020. Emphasizing publishers does not efectively reduce susceptibility to misinformation on social media. The Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 1, 1 (2020), 1--12. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-001Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Lisa Fazio. 2020. Pausing to consider why a headline is true or false can help reduce the sharing of false news. The Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 1, 2 (2020), 1--8. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-009Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Seth Flaxman, Sharad Goel, and Justin M. Rao. 2016. Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly 80, S1 (Mar 2016), 298--320. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfw006Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Brian Jefrey Fogg. 2002. Persuasive technology: Using computers to change what we think and do (1 ed.). Number December. Morgan Kaufmann, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/764008.763957Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Alain Forget, Sonia Chiasson, and Robert Biddle. 2009. Lessons from brain age on persuasion for computer security. In CHI '09 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Boston, MA, USA) (CHI EA '09). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4435--4440. https://doi.org/10.1145/1520340.1520679Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Adrien Friggeri, Lada Adamic, Dean Eckles, and Justin Cheng. 2014. Rumor cascades. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media 8, 1 (2014). https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14559Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Catherine O. Fritz, Peter E. Morris, and Jennifer J. Richler. 2012. Efect size estimates: Current use, calculations, and interpretation. Journal of experimental psychology: General 141, 1 (2012), 2--18. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024338Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Kiran Garimella, Gianmarco De Francisci Morales, Aristides Gionis, and Michael Mathioudakis. 2017. Reducing controversy by connecting opposing views. In Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining (Cambridge, United Kingdom) (WSDM '17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 81--90. https://doi.org/10.1145/3018661.3018703Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. R. Kelly Garrett and Brian E. Weeks. 2013. The promise and peril of real-time corrections to political misperceptions. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1047--1058. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441895Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Maria Glenski, Corey Pennycuf, and Tim Weninger. 2017. Consumers and curators: Browsing and voting patterns on Reddit. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems 4, 4 (2017), 196--206. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCSS.2017. 2742242Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  23. Samuel Greengard. 2020. Will deepfakes do deep damage? Commun. ACM 63, 1 (2020), 17--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Nir Grinberg, Kenneth Joseph, Lisa Friedland, Briony Swire-Thompson, and David Lazer. 2019. Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Science 363, 6425 (2019), 374--378. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Andrew Guess, Jonathan Nagler, and Joshua Tucker. 2019. Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances 5, 1 (2019), 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4586Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Andrew Guess, Brendan Nyhan, and Jason Reifer. 2018. Selective exposure to misinformation: Evidence from the consumption of fake news during the 2016 US presidential campaign. European Research Council 9, 3 (2018), 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Jimmeka J. Guillory and Lisa Geraci. 2013. Correcting erroneous inferences in memory: The role of source credibility. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 2, 4 (2013), 201--209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.10.001Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  28. Aditi Gupta, Hemank Lamba, Ponnurangam Kumaraguru, and Anupam Joshi. 2013. Faking Sandy: Characterizing and identifying fake images on Twitter during Hurricane Sandy. In Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on World Wide Web (Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) (WWW '13 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 729--736. https://doi.org/10.1145/2487788.2488033Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Michael Hameleers, Thomas E. Powell, Toni G. L. A. Van Der Meer, and Lieke Bos. 2020. A picture paints a thousand lies? The efects and mechanisms of multimodal disinformation and rebuttals disseminated via social media. Political Communication 37, 2 (2020), 281--301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1674979Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Michael Hameleers and Toni G. L. A. van der Meer. 2020. Misinformation and polarization in a high-Choice media environment: How efective are political fact-Checkers? Communication Research 47, 2 (2020), 227--250. https: //doi.org/10.1177/0093650218819671Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Jane Im, Sonali Tandon, Eshwar Chandrasekharan, Taylor Denby, and Eric Gilbert. 2020. Synthesized social signals: Computationally-derived social signals from account histories. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376383Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Dean Jackson. 2017. Issue brief: Distinguishing disinformation from propaganda, misinformation, and "fake news". National Endowment for Democracy (2017). https://www.ned.org/issue-brief-distinguishing-disinformation-from-propaganda-misinformation-and-fake-newsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Maurice Jakesch, Moran Koren, Anna Evtushenko, and Mor Naaman. 2019. The role ofsource and expressive responding in political news evaluation. Presented at Computation and Journalism Symposium. https://people.jacobs.cornell.edu/ mor/publications/thegoods/jakesch_cplusj19__trustnews.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Antonis Kalogeropoulos, Richard Fletcher, and Rasmus Kleis Nielsen. 2019. News brand attribution in distributed environments: Do people know where they get their news? New Media & Society 21, 3 (2019), 583--601. https: //doi.org/10.1177/1461444818801313Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Adam D. I. Kramer, Jamie E. Guillory, and Jefrey T. Hancock. 2014. Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111, 24 (2014), 8788--8790. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320040111Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Srijan Kumar and Neil Shah. 2018. False information on Web and social media: A survey. In Social Media Analytics: Advances and Applications. CRC Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Srijan Kumar, Robert West, and Jure Leskovec. 2016. Disinformation on the web: Impact, characteristics, and detection of Wikipedia hoaxes. In Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on World Wide Web (Montréal, Québec, Canada) (WWW '16). International World Wide Web Conferences Steering Committee, Republic and Canton of Geneva, CHE, 591--602. https://doi.org/10.1145/2872427.2883085Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. David M. J. Lazer, Matthew A. Baum, Yochai Benkler, Adam J. Berinsky, Kelly M. Greenhill, Filippo Menczer, Miriam J. Metzger, Brendan Nyhan, Gordon Pennycook, David Rothschild, Michael Schudson, Steven A. Sloman, Cass R. Sunstein, Emily A. Thorson, Duncan J. Watts, and Jonathan L. Zittrain. 2018. The science of fake news. Science 359, 6380 (2018), 1094--1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Shu-Yueh Lee, Sara Stefes Hansen, and Jin Kyun Lee. 2016. What makes us click "like" on Facebook? Examining psychological, technological, and motivational factors on virtual endorsement. Computer Communications 73 (2016), 332--341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2015.08.002 Online Social Networks.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Stephan Lewandowsky, Ullrich K. H. Ecker, and John Cook. 2017. Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the "post-truth" era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 6, 4 (2017), 353--369. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Sonia Livingstone. 2004. Media literacy and the challenge of new information and communication technologies. The Communication Review 7, 1 (2004), 3--14. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714420490280152Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Lauren Lutzke, Caitlin Drummond, Paul Slovic, and Joseph Árvai. 2019. Priming critical thinking: Simple interventions limit the infuence of fake news about climate change on Facebook. Global Environmental Change 58, 101964 (2019), 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101964Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Drew B. Margolin, Aniko Hannak, and Ingmar Weber. 2018. Political fact-Checking on Twitter: When do corrections have an effect? Political Communication 35, 2 (2018), 196--219. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2017.1334018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Sarah McGrew. 2020. Learning to evaluate: An intervention in civic online reasoning. Computers & Education 145, 103711 (2020), 1--13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103711Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Sarah McGrew, Joel Breakstone, Teresa Ortega, Mark Smith, and Sam Wineburg. 2018. Can students evaluate online sources? Learning from assessments of civic online reasoning. Theory & Research in Social Education 46, 2 (2018), 165--193. https://doi.org/10.1080/00933104.2017.1416320Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Solomon Messing and Sean J. Westwood. 2014. Selective exposure in the age of social media: Endorsements trump partisan source afliation when selecting news online. Communication Research 41, 8 (2014), 1042--1063. https: //doi.org/10.1177/0093650212466406Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. Nicholas Micallef and Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage. 2017. A gamifed approach to improve users' memorability of fall-back authentication. In Thirteenth Symposium on Usable Privacy and Security (Santa Clara, CA) (SOUPS 2017). USENIX Association. https://www.usenix.org/conference/soups2017/workshop-program/way2017/micallefGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Nicholas Micallef and Nalin Asanka Gamagedara Arachchilage. 2018. Security questions education: Exploring gamifed features and functionalities. Information & Computer Security 26, 3 (2018), 365--378. https://doi.org/10.1108/ICS-03-2018-0033Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  49. Nicholas Micallef, Bing He, Srijan Kumar, Mustaque Ahamad, and Nasir Memon. 2020. The role of the crowd in countering misinformation: A case study of the COVID-19 infodemic. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData 2020). IEEE. https://arxiv.org/abs/2011.05773Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. VidyaNarayanan, Vlad Barash, John Kelly, Bence Kollanyi, Lisa-MariaNeudert, and PhilipN. Howard. 2018. Polarization, partisanship and junk news consumption over social media in the US. arXiv:1803.01845 [cs.SI]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Raymond S. Nickerson. 1998. Confrmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology 2, 2 (1998), 175--220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089--2680.2.2.175Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Thomas Nygren, Fredrik Brounéus, and Göran Svensson. 2019. Diversity and credibility in young people's news feeds: A foundation for teaching and learning citizenship in a digital era. Journal of Social Science Education 18, 2 Summer 2019 (2019), 87--109. https://doi.org/10.4119/jsse-917Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Brendan Nyhan, Ethan Porter, Jason Reifer, and Thomas J. Wood. 2020. Taking fact-Checks literally but not seriously? The efects of journalistic fact-checking on factual beliefs and candidate favorability. Political Behavior 42, 3 (2020), 939--960. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09528-xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifer. 2010. When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior 32, 2 (2010), 303--330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  55. Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch and S. Shyam Sundar. 2015. Posting, commenting, and tagging: Efects of sharing news stories on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior 44 (2015), 240--249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.024Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Pinar Ozturk, Huaye Li, and Yasuaki Sakamoto. 2015. Combating rumor spread on social media: The efectiveness of refutation and warning. In 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. 2406--2414. https: //doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2015.288Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  57. Gordon Pennycook, Adam Bear, Evan T. Collins, and David G. Rand. 2020. The implied truth efect: Attaching warnings to a subset of fake news headlines increases perceived accuracy of headlines without warnings. Management Science 66, 11 (2020), 4944--4957. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3478Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Gordon Pennycook, Jonathon McPhetres, Yunhao Zhang, Jackson G. Lu, and David G. Rand. 2020. Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological Science 31, 7 (2020), 770--780. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620939054Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Gordon Pennycook and David G. Rand. 2019. Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116, 7 (2019), 2521--2526. https://doi.org/10. 1073/pnas.1806781116Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  60. Gordon Pennycook and David G. Rand. 2020. Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality 88, 2 (2020), 185--200. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12476Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. Verónica Pérez-Rosas, Bennett Kleinberg, Alexandra Lefevre, and Rada Mihalcea. 2018. Automatic detection of fake news. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics, Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA, 3391--3401. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/C18--1287Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  62. Walter Quattrociocchi, Antonio Scala, and Cass R. Sunstein. 2016. Echo chambers on Facebook. Social Science Research Network (2016), 1--15. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2795110Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden. 2019. The fake news game: Actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation. Journal of Risk Research 22, 5 (2019), 570--580. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden. 2019. Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications 5, 1, Article 65 (2019), 10 pages. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Chengcheng Shao, Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia, Onur Varol, Kai-Cheng Yang, Alessandro Flammini, and Filippo Menczer. 2018. The spread of low-credibility content by social bots. Nature Communications 9, 4787 (2018), 1--9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06930-7Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. Chengcheng Shao, Pik-Mai Hui, Lei Wang, Xinwen Jiang, Alessandro Flammini, Filippo Menczer, and Giovanni Luca Ciampaglia. 2018. Anatomy of an online misinformation network. PLOS ONE 13, 4 (Apr 2018), 1--23. https: //doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0196087Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  67. Cuihua Shen, Mona Kasra, Wenjing Pan, Grace A. Bassett, Yining Malloch, and James F. O'Brien. 2019. Fake images: The efects of source, intermediary, and digital media literacy on contextual assessment of image credibility online. New Media & Society 21, 2 (2019), 438--463. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818799526Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  68. Jieun Shin and Kjerstin Thorson. 2017. Partisan selective sharing: The biased difusion of fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication 67, 2 (Feb 2017), 233--255. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12284Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  69. Kai Shu, Amy Sliva, Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. 2017. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 19, 1 (Sep 2017), 22--36. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137597.3137600Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  70. Craig Silverman. 2015. Lies, damn lies, and viral content. Tow Center for Digital Journalism, Columbia Journalism School A Tow/Knight Report (2015). https://doi.org/10.7916/D8Q81RHHGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. Craig Silverman. 2016. This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. BuzzFeed News (2016). https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebookGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. Kate Starbird. 2019. Disinformation's spread: Bots, trolls and all of us. Nature 571, 7766 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. Kate Starbird, Jim Maddock, Mania Orand, Peg Achterman, and Robert M. Mason. 2014. Rumors, false fags, and digital vigilantes: Misinformation on Twitter after the 2013 Boston marathon bombing. In Proceedings of iConference 2014. iSchools. https://doi.org/10.9776/14308Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. David Sterrett, Dan Malato, Jennifer Benz, Liz Kantor, Trevor Tompson, Tom Rosenstiel, Jef Sonderman, and Kevin Loker. 2019. Who shared it?: Deciding what news to trust on social media. Digital Journalism 7, 6 (2019), 783--801. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2019.1623702Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  75. Leo G. Stewart, Ahmer Arif, and Kate Starbird. 2018. Examining trolls and polarization with a retweet network. In Proceedings of MIS2: Misinformation and Misbehavior Mining on the Web (Workshop held in conjunction with WSDM 2018). http://snap.stanford.edu/mis2/fles/MIS2_paper_21.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. Charles S. Taber and Milton Lodge. 2006. Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. American Journal of Political Science 50, 3 (2006), 755--769. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.xGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  77. Emily Thorson. 2016. Belief echoes: The persistent efects of corrected misinformation. Political Communication 33, 3 (2016), 460--480. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2015.1102187Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  78. Sander van der Linden. 2017. Beating the hell out of fake news. Ethical Record: Proceedings of the Conway Hall Ethical Society 122, 6 (2017), 4--7. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3089590Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  79. Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral. 2018. The spread of true and false news online. Science 359, 6380 (2018), 1146--1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Emily K. Vraga and Leticia Bode. 2017. Using expert sources to correct health misinformation in social media. Science Communication 39, 5 (2017), 621--645. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547017731776Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. Emily K. Vraga and Leticia Bode. 2018. I do not believe you: How providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms. Information, Communication & Society 21, 10 (2018), 1337--1353. https://doi.org/10. 1080/1369118X.2017.1313883Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  82. Emily K. Vraga, Leticia Bode, and Melissa Tully. 2020. Creating news literacy messages to enhance expert corrections of misinformation on Twitter. Communication Research (Jan 2020), 1--23. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219898094Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Thomas Wood and Ethan Porter. 2019. The elusive backfre efect: Mass attitudes' steadfast factual adherence. Political Behavior 41, 1 (2019), 135--163. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-018-9443-yGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  84. Waheeb Yaqub, Otari Kakhidze, Morgan L. Brockman, Nasir Memon, and Sameer Patil. 2020. Efects of credibility indicators on social media news sharing intent. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Honolulu, HI, USA) (CHI '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376213Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  85. Dannagal G. Young, Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Shannon Poulsen, and Abigail Goldring. 2018. Fact-checking efectiveness as a function of format and tone: Evaluating Factcheck.org and Flackcheck.org. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 95, 1 (2018), 49--75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699017710453Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Fakey: A Game Intervention to Improve News Literacy on Social Media

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!