Abstract
When users on social media share content without considering its veracity, they may unwittingly be spreading misinformation. In this work, we investigate the design of lightweight interventions that nudge users to assess the accuracy of information as they share it. Such assessment may deter users from posting misinformation in the first place, and their assessments may also provide useful guidance to friends aiming to assess those posts themselves.
In support of lightweight assessment, we first develop a taxonomy of the reasons why people believe a news claim is or is not true; this taxonomy yields a checklist that can be used at posting time. We conduct evaluations to demonstrate that the checklist is an accurate and comprehensive encapsulation of people's free-response rationales.
In a second experiment, we study the effects of three behavioral nudges---1) checkboxes indicating whether headings are accurate, 2) tagging reasons (from our taxonomy) that a post is accurate via a checklist and 3) providing free-text rationales for why a headline is or is not accurate---on people's intention of sharing the headline on social media. From an experiment with 1668 participants, we find that both providing accuracy assessment and rationale reduce the sharing of false content. They also reduce the sharing of true content, but to a lesser degree that yields an overall decrease in the fraction of shared content that is false.
Our findings have implications for designing social media and news sharing platforms that draw from richer signals of content credibility contributed by users. In addition, our validated taxonomy can be used by platforms and researchers as a way to gather rationales in an easier fashion than free-response.
Supplemental Material
Available for Download
- [n.d.]. Combatting Vaccine Misinformation - About Facebook. https://about.fb.com/news/2019/03/combatting-vaccinemisinformation/Google Scholar
- [n.d.]. Facebook apologises for blocking Prager University's videos. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-45247302Google Scholar
- [n.d.]. Facebook is ditching its own solution to fake news because it didn't work. https://qz.com/1162973/to-fight-fakenews-facebook-is-replacing-flagging-posts-as-disputed-with-related-articles/Google Scholar
- [n.d.]. https://www.facebook.com/journalismproject/programs/third-party-fact-checking. https://www.facebook.com/journalismproject/programs/third-party-fact-checkingGoogle Scholar
- Jennifer Nancy Lee Allen, Antonio Alonso Arechar, Gordon Pennycook, and David Rand. 2020. Scaling up fact-checking using the wisdom of crowds. (2020).Google Scholar
- Marc-André Argentino. [n.d.]. QAnon and the storm of the U.S. Capitol: The offline effect of online conspiracy theories. https://theconversation.com/qanon-and-the-storm-of-the-u-s-capitol-the-offline-effect-of-online-conspiracy-theories-152815Google Scholar
- Natalya N Bazarova, Yoon Hyung Choi, Victoria Schwanda Sosik, Dan Cosley, and Janis Whitlock. 2015. Social sharing of emotions on Facebook: Channel differences, satisfaction, and replies. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 154--164.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Shashank Bengali. 2019. How WhatsApp is battling misinformation in India, where 'fake news is part of our culture'. Los Angeles Times. https://www.latimes.com/world/la-fg-india-whatsapp-2019-story.html (2019).Google Scholar
- Md Momen Bhuiyan, Amy X Zhang, Connie Moon Sehat, and Tanushree Mitra. 2020. Investigating Differences in Crowdsourced News Credibility Assessment: Raters, Tasks, and Expert Criteria. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, Vol. 4, CSCW2 (2020), 1--26.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Leticia Bode and Emily K Vraga. 2018. See something, say something: Correction of global health misinformation on social media. Health communication, Vol. 33, 9 (2018), 1131--1140.Google Scholar
- Alexandre Bovet and Hernán A Makse. 2019. Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Nature communications, Vol. 10, 1 (2019), 1--14.Google Scholar
- Carlos Castillo, Marcelo Mendoza, and Barbara Poblete. 2011. Information credibility on twitter. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web. 675--684.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kathy Charmaz and Linda Liska Belgrave. 2007. Grounded theory. The Blackwell encyclopedia of sociology (2007).Google Scholar
- Edward T Cokely, Mirta Galesic, Eric Schulz, Saima Ghazal, and Rocio Garcia-Retamero. 2012. Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin numeracy test. Judgment and Decision making (2012).Google Scholar
- Alistair Coleman. [n.d.]. 'Hundreds dead' because of Covid-19 misinformation. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-53755067Google Scholar
- 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, Vol. 113, 3 (2016), 554--559.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Nicholas Dias, Gordon Pennycook, and David G Rand. 2020. Emphasizing publishers does not effectively reduce susceptibility to misinformation on social media. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, Vol. 1, 1 (2020).Google Scholar
- Pranav Dixit and Ryan Mac. 2018. How WhatsApp Destroyed A Village. Buzzfeed News (2018).Google Scholar
- Ziv Epstein, Gordon Pennycook, and David Rand. 2020. Will the crowd game the algorithm? Using layperson judgments to combat misinformation on social media by downranking distrusted sources. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--11.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Martin Flintham, Christian Karner, Khaled Bachour, Helen Creswick, Neha Gupta, and Stuart Moran. 2018. Falling for fake news: investigating the consumption of news via social media. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--10.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Shane Frederick. 2005. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic perspectives, Vol. 19, 4 (2005), 25--42.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Christine Geeng, Savanna Yee, and Franziska Roesner. 2020. Fake News on Facebook and Twitter: Investigating How People (Don't) Investigate. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--14.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Lucas Graves. 2016. Deciding what's true: The rise of political fact-checking in American journalism. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
- Nir Grinberg, Kenneth Joseph, Lisa Friedland, Briony Swire-Thompson, and David Lazer. 2019. Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Science, Vol. 363, 6425 (2019), 374--378.Google Scholar
- Nir Grinberg, Shankar Kalyanaraman, Lada A Adamic, and Mor Naaman. 2017. Understanding feedback expectations on Facebook. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing. 726--739.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Jennifer Grygiel and Nina Brown. 2019. Are social media companies motivated to be good corporate citizens? Examination of the connection between corporate social responsibility and social media safety. Telecommunications Policy, Vol. 43, 5 (2019), 445--460.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Andrew Guess, Jonathan Nagler, and Joshua Tucker. 2019. Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science advances, Vol. 5, 1 (2019), eaau4586.Google Scholar
- Maria Haigh, Thomas Haigh, and Tetiana Matychak. 2019. Information Literacy vs. Fake News: The Case of Ukraine. Open Information Science, Vol. 3, 1 (2019), 154--165.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Aniko Hannak, Drew Margolin, Brian Keegan, and Ingmar Weber. 2014. Get Back! You Don't Know Me Like That: The Social Mediation of Fact Checking Interventions in Twitter Conversations.. In ICWSM.Google Scholar
- Yasmin Ibrahim. 2017. Facebook and the Napalm Girl: reframing the iconic as pornographic. Social Media Society, Vol. 3, 4 (2017), 2056305117743140Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Alireza Karduni, Isaac Cho, Ryan Wesslen, Sashank Santhanam, Svitlana Volkova, Dustin L Arendt, Samira Shaikh, and Wenwen Dou. 2019. Vulnerable to misinformation? Verifi!. In Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. 312--323.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Makena Kelly. [n.d.]. Facebook proves Elizabeth Warren's point by deleting her ads about breaking up Facebook. https://www.theverge.com/2019/3/11/18260857/facebook-senator-elizabeth-warren-campaign-ads-removal-tech-break-up-regulationGoogle Scholar
- Jooyeon Kim, Behzad Tabibian, Alice Oh, Bernhard Schölkopf, and Manuel Gomez-Rodriguez. 2018. Leveraging the crowd to detect and reduce the spread of fake news and misinformation. In Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM International Conference on Web Search and Data Mining. 324--332.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Frauke Kreuter, Stanley Presser, and Roger Tourangeau. 2008. Social desirability bias in cati, ivr, and web surveysthe effects of mode and question sensitivity. Public opinion quarterly, Vol. 72, 5 (2008), 847--865.Google Scholar
- Travis Kriplean, Caitlin Bonnar, Alan Borning, Bo Kinney, and Brian Gill. 2014. Integrating on-demand fact-checking with public dialogue. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 1188--1199.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J Richard Landis and Gary G Koch. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. biometrics (1977), 159--174.Google Scholar
- Farhad Manjoo. 2013. You won't finish this article. Why people online don't read to the end: Slate (2013).Google Scholar
- Drew B Margolin, Aniko Hannak, and Ingmar Weber. 2018. Political fact-checking on Twitter: When do corrections have an effect? Political Communication, Vol. 35, 2 (2018), 196--219.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Cameron Martel, Mohsen Mosleh, and David Gertler Rand. 2021. You're definitely wrong, maybe: Correction style has minimal effect on corrections of misinformation online. Media and Communication, Vol. 9, 1 (2021).Google Scholar
- Alice E Marwick. 2018. Why do people share fake news? A sociotechnical model of media effects. Georgetown Law Technology Review, Vol. 2, 2 (2018), 474--512.Google Scholar
- Jim McCambridge, John Witton, and Diana R Elbourne. 2014. Systematic review of the Hawthorne effect: new concepts are needed to study research participation effects. Journal of clinical epidemiology, Vol. 67, 3 (2014), 267--277.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Meredith Ringel Morris, Scott Counts, Asta Roseway, Aaron Hoff, and Julia Schwarz. 2012. Tweeting is believing? Understanding microblog credibility perceptions. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on computer supported cooperative work. 441--450.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Mohsen Mosleh, Cameron Martel, Dean Eckles, and David G. Rand. 2021 a. Perverse Downstream Consequences of Debunking: Being Corrected by Another User for Posting False Political News Increases Subsequent Sharing of Low Quality, Partisan, and Toxic Content in a Twitter Field Experiment. In To appear in proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.Google Scholar
- Mohsen Mosleh, Cameron Martel, Dean Eckles, and David G Rand. 2021 b. Shared partisanship dramatically increases social tie formation in a Twitter field experiment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 118, 7 (2021).Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Mohsen Mosleh, Gordon Pennycook, Antonio A Arechar, and David G Rand. 2021 c. Cognitive reflection correlates with behavior on Twitter. Nature Communications, Vol. 12, 1 (2021), 1--10.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Mohsen Mosleh, Gordon Pennycook, and David G Rand. 2020. Self-reported willingness to share political news articles in online surveys correlates with actual sharing on Twitter. Plos one, Vol. 15, 2 (2020), e0228882.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Samuel Murray, Matthew Stanley, Jonathon McPhetres, Gordon Pennycook, and Paul Seli. 2020. " I've said it before and I will say it again": Repeating statements made by Donald Trump increases perceived truthfulness for individuals across the political spectrum. (2020).Google Scholar
- Onook Oh, Kyounghee Hazel Kwon, and H Raghav Rao. 2010. An Exploration of Social Media in Extreme Events: Rumor Theory and Twitter during the Haiti Earthquake 2010.. In Icis, Vol. 231. 7332--7336.Google Scholar
- Sheila O'Riordan, Gaye Kiely, Bill Emerson, and Joseph Feller. 2019. Do you have a source for that? Understanding the Challenges of Collaborative Evidence-based Journalism. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Open Collaboration. 1--10.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Gordon Pennycook, Adam Bear, Evan T Collins, and David G Rand. 2020 a. The implied truth effect: Attaching warnings to a subset of fake news headlines increases perceived accuracy of headlines without warnings. Management Science (2020).Google Scholar
- Gordon Pennycook, Tyrone D Cannon, and David G Rand. 2018. Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of experimental psychology: general, Vol. 147, 12 (2018), 1865.Google Scholar
- Gordon Pennycook, Ziv Epstein, Mohsen Mosleh, Antonio A Arechar, Dean Eckles, and David G Rand. 2021. Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online. Nature (2021).Google Scholar
- Gordon Pennycook, Jonathon McPhetres, Yunhao Zhang, Jackson G Lu, and David G Rand. 2020 b. Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological science, Vol. 31, 7 (2020), 770--780.Google Scholar
- Gordon Pennycook and David G Rand. 2019 a. Fighting misinformation on social media using crowdsourced judgments of news source quality. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol. 116, 7 (2019), 2521--2526.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Gordon Pennycook and David G Rand. 2019 b. Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, Vol. 188 (2019), 39--50.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Julie Posetti and Alice Matthews. 2018. A short guide to the history of ?fake news' and disinformation. International Center For Journalists (2018), 2018--07.Google Scholar
- Martin Potthast, Sebastian Köpsel, Benno Stein, and Matthias Hagen. 2016. Clickbait detection. In European Conference on Information Retrieval. Springer, 810--817.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Chris Preist, Elaine Massung, and David Coyle. 2014. Competing or aiming to be average? Normification as a means of engaging digital volunteers. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing. 1222--1233.Google Scholar
- Walter Quattrociocchi, Antonio Scala, and Cass R Sunstein. 2016. Echo chambers on Facebook. Available at SSRN 2795110 (2016).Google Scholar
- John Reed. 2018. Hate speech, atrocities and fake news: The crisis of democracy in Myanmar. Financial Times. Retrieved from https://www. ft. com/content/2003d54e-169a-11e8-9376-4a6390addb44 (2018).Google Scholar
- Ana Lucía Schmidt, Fabiana Zollo, Antonio Scala, Cornelia Betsch, and Walter Quattrociocchi. 2018. Polarization of the vaccination debate on Facebook. Vaccine, Vol. 36, 25 (2018), 3606--3612.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Scott Shane. 2017. The fake Americans Russia created to influence the election. The New York Time, Vol. 7, 09 (2017).Google Scholar
- 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, Vol. 9, 1 (2018), 1--9.Google Scholar
- Jieun Shin, Lian Jian, Kevin Driscoll, and Francc ois Bar. 2017. Political rumoring on Twitter during the 2012 US presidential election: Rumor diffusion and correction. new media & society, Vol. 19, 8 (2017), 1214--1235.Google Scholar
- Jieun Shin and Kjerstin Thorson. 2017. Partisan selective sharing: The biased diffusion of fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication, Vol. 67, 2 (2017), 233--255.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Robert Shrimsley. [n.d.]. Facebook photos: snap judgments. https://www.ft.com/content/dbcdf744-7ac6-11e6-b837-eb4b4333ee43Google Scholar
- Kai Shu, Amy Sliva, Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. 2017. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter, Vol. 19, 1 (2017), 22--36.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Sara Spray. [n.d.]. Facebook Is Embroiled In A Row With Activists Over "Censorship". https://www.buzzfeed.com/saraspary/facebook-in-dispute-with-pro-kurdish-activists-over-deletedGoogle Scholar
- Kate Starbird, Ahmer Arif, Tom Wilson, Katherine Van Koevering, Katya Yefimova, and Daniel Scarnecchia. 2018a. Ecosystem or Echo-System? Exploring Content Sharing across Alternative Media Domains.. In ICWSM. 365--374.Google Scholar
- Kate Starbird, Dharma Dailey, Owla Mohamed, Gina Lee, and Emma S Spiro. 2018b. Engage early, correct more: How journalists participate in false rumors online during crisis events. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1--12.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kate Starbird, Jim Maddock, Mania Orand, Peg Achterman, and Robert M Mason. 2014. Rumors, false flags, and digital vigilantes: Misinformation on twitter after the 2013 boston marathon bombing. IConference 2014 Proceedings (2014).Google Scholar
- Paul Steinhauser. [n.d.]. Arizona certifies Biden as election winner, with Wisconsin following hours later. https://www.foxnews.com/politics/arizona-wisconsin-election-certification-biden-trumpGoogle Scholar
- Anselm L Strauss. 1987. Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge university press.Google Scholar
- S Shyam Sundar. 1998. Effect of source attribution on perception of online news stories. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, Vol. 75, 1 (1998), 55--68.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral. 2018. The spread of true and false news online. Science, Vol. 359, 6380 (2018), 1146--1151.Google Scholar
- Emily K Vraga and Leticia Bode. 2017. Using expert sources to correct health misinformation in social media. Science Communication, Vol. 39, 5 (2017), 621--645.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Emily K Vraga and Leticia Bode. 2020. Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature: using expertise and evidence for describing misinformation. Political Communication, Vol. 37, 1 (2020), 136--144.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Claire Wardle and Hossein Derakhshan. 2017. Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe report, Vol. 27 (2017).Google Scholar
- Sam Wineburg and Sarah McGrew. 2017. Lateral reading: Reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. (2017).Google Scholar
- Liang Wu, Jundong Li, Xia Hu, and Huan Liu. 2017. Gleaning wisdom from the past: Early detection of emerging rumors in social media. In Proceedings of the 2017 SIAM international conference on data mining. SIAM, 99--107.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Waheeb Yaqub, Otari Kakhidze, Morgan L Brockman, Nasir Memon, and Sameer Patil. 2020. Effects of Credibility Indicators on Social Media News Sharing Intent. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1--14.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Amy X Zhang, Aditya Ranganathan, Sarah Emlen Metz, Scott Appling, Connie Moon Sehat, Norman Gilmore, Nick B Adams, Emmanuel Vincent, Jennifer Lee, Martin Robbins, et almbox. 2018. A structured response to misinformation: Defining and annotating credibility indicators in news articles. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018. 603--612.Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Arkaitz Zubiaga, Maria Liakata, Rob Procter, Geraldine Wong Sak Hoi, and Peter Tolmie. 2016. Analysing how people orient to and spread rumours in social media by looking at conversational threads. PloS one, Vol. 11, 3 (2016), e0150989.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Index Terms
Exploring Lightweight Interventions at Posting Time to Reduce the Sharing of Misinformation on Social Media
Recommendations
The diffusion of misinformation on social media
This study examines dynamic communication processes of political misinformation on social media focusing on three components: the temporal pattern, content mutation, and sources of misinformation. We traced the lifecycle of 17 popular political rumors ...
Are Mutated Misinformation More Contagious? A Case Study of COVID-19 Misinformation on Twitter
WebSci '22: Proceedings of the 14th ACM Web Science Conference 2022The spread of online misinformation has become a major global risk. Understanding how misinformation propagates on social media is vital. While prior studies suggest that the content factors, such as emotion and topic in texts, are closely related to ...
Why Do Social Media Users Share Misinformation?
JCDL '15: Proceedings of the 15th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital LibrariesWidespread misinformation on social media is a cause of concern. Currently, it is unclear what factors prompt regular social media users with no malicious intent to forward misinformation to their online networks. Using a questionnaire informed by the ...






Comments