How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking?
Abstract Recently, crowdsourcing has been proposed as a tool for fighting misinformation online. Will internet users listen to crowdsourced fact-checking, and how? In this experiment we test how participants follow others’ opinions to evaluate the validity of a science-themed Facebook post and exami...
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2023-11-01
|
| Series: | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02329-y |
| _version_ | 1797453521847582720 |
|---|---|
| author | Folco Panizza Piero Ronzani Tiffany Morisseau Simone Mattavelli Carlo Martini |
| author_facet | Folco Panizza Piero Ronzani Tiffany Morisseau Simone Mattavelli Carlo Martini |
| author_sort | Folco Panizza |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Recently, crowdsourcing has been proposed as a tool for fighting misinformation online. Will internet users listen to crowdsourced fact-checking, and how? In this experiment we test how participants follow others’ opinions to evaluate the validity of a science-themed Facebook post and examine which factors mediate the use of this information. Participants observed a post presenting either scientific information or misinformation, along with a graphical summary of previous participants’ judgements. Even though most participants reported not having used information from previous raters, their responses were influenced by previous assessments. This happened regardless of whether prior judgements were accurate or misleading. Presenting crowdsourced fact-checking however did not translate into the blind copying of the majority response. Rather, participants tended to use this social information as a cue to guide their response, while also relying on individual evaluation and research for extra information. These results highlight the role of individual reasoning when evaluating online information, while pointing to the potential benefit of crowd-sourcing-based solutions in making online users more resilient to misinformation. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-09T15:24:04Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-16e01f9aded3429b93177d0f2763c75c |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2662-9992 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-09T15:24:04Z |
| publishDate | 2023-11-01 |
| publisher | Springer Nature |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| spelling | doaj.art-16e01f9aded3429b93177d0f2763c75c2023-11-26T12:38:07ZengSpringer NatureHumanities & Social Sciences Communications2662-99922023-11-0110111110.1057/s41599-023-02329-yHow do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking?Folco Panizza0Piero Ronzani1Tiffany Morisseau2Simone Mattavelli3Carlo Martini4Molecular Mind Laboratory, IMT School for Advanced Studies LuccaInternational Security and Development CenterUniversité Paris Cité and Univ. Gustave Eiffel, LaPEADepartment of Psychology, Bicocca UniversityCentre for Applied and Experimental Epistemology, Department of Philosophy, Vita-Salute San Raffaele UniversityAbstract Recently, crowdsourcing has been proposed as a tool for fighting misinformation online. Will internet users listen to crowdsourced fact-checking, and how? In this experiment we test how participants follow others’ opinions to evaluate the validity of a science-themed Facebook post and examine which factors mediate the use of this information. Participants observed a post presenting either scientific information or misinformation, along with a graphical summary of previous participants’ judgements. Even though most participants reported not having used information from previous raters, their responses were influenced by previous assessments. This happened regardless of whether prior judgements were accurate or misleading. Presenting crowdsourced fact-checking however did not translate into the blind copying of the majority response. Rather, participants tended to use this social information as a cue to guide their response, while also relying on individual evaluation and research for extra information. These results highlight the role of individual reasoning when evaluating online information, while pointing to the potential benefit of crowd-sourcing-based solutions in making online users more resilient to misinformation.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02329-y |
| spellingShingle | Folco Panizza Piero Ronzani Tiffany Morisseau Simone Mattavelli Carlo Martini How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| title | How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? |
| title_full | How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? |
| title_fullStr | How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? |
| title_full_unstemmed | How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? |
| title_short | How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking? |
| title_sort | how do online users respond to crowdsourced fact checking |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-02329-y |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT folcopanizza howdoonlineusersrespondtocrowdsourcedfactchecking AT pieroronzani howdoonlineusersrespondtocrowdsourcedfactchecking AT tiffanymorisseau howdoonlineusersrespondtocrowdsourcedfactchecking AT simonemattavelli howdoonlineusersrespondtocrowdsourcedfactchecking AT carlomartini howdoonlineusersrespondtocrowdsourcedfactchecking |