Who Does Not Benefit from Fact-checking Websites?
Who Does Not Benefit from Fact-checking Websites?
复制标题
谁不能从事实核查网站中受益？
DOI：
10.1145/3544548.3580826
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Inui Kentaro
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Tanaka Yuko;Inuzuka Miwa;Arai Hiromi;Takahashi Yoichi;Kukita Minao;Inui Kentaro
事实核查信息被主观地分享或忽略。用户倾向于寻找志同道合的信息，而忽略与他们先前存在的信念相冲突的信息，从而使志同道合的错误信息在互联网上不受控制。为了了解分散事实核查参与的因素，我们调查了与用户选择性避免点击不合适事实相关的心理特征。在一个预先注册的实验中，我们测量了参与者（N = 506）对COVID-19相关新闻刺激的预先存在的信念。然后，我们检查了他们是否点击了他们认为准确的虚假新闻的事实核查链接。我们提出了一个指数，使用数学基线将参与者分为事实回避组和事实暴露组。结果表明，43%的参与者选择性地避免点击不合适的事实，保持了93%的错误信念。自反性是预测选择性回避的心理特征。我们讨论的敏感性点击偏见，防止用户利用事实核查网站和未来的设计的影响。
Fact-checking messages are shared or ignored subjectively. Users tend to seek like-minded information and ignore information that conflicts with their preexisting beliefs, leaving like-minded misinformation uncontrolled on the Internet. To understand the factors that distract fact-checking engagement, we investigated the psychological characteristics associated with users’ selective avoidance of clicking uncongenial facts. In a pre-registered experiment, we measured participants’ (N = 506) preexisting beliefs about COVID-19-related news stimuli. We then examined whether they clicked on fact-checking links to false news that they believed to be accurate. We proposed an index that divided participants into fact-avoidance and fact-exposure groups using a mathematical baseline. The results indicated that 43% of participants selectively avoided clicking on uncongenial facts, keeping 93% of their false beliefs intact. Reflexiveness is the psychological characteristic that predicts selective avoidance. We discuss susceptibility to click bias that prevents users from utilizing fact-checking websites and the implications for future design.