Citizens' Expectations on Brexit Outcomes: 'Fact' Transmission and Persuasive Power in a Digital World

公民对英国脱欧结果的期望：数字世界中的“事实”传播和说服力

• 批准号: ES/R001901/1
• 负责人: Laura Cram
• 金额: $ 36.28万
• 依托单位: University of Edinburgh
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2017
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2017 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FR001901%2F1
• 关键词: Citizens; Expectations; Brexit; Outcomes; Fact

This collaborative project between the Neuropolitics Research Lab (NRlabs), at the University of Edinburgh and Full Fact, the UK's independent fact-checking organization, employs neuroscientific, psychological and behavioural insights to help us to understand what makes Brexit-related claims spread on digital platforms. Using cutting edge scientific techniques in big data analysis this project offers new insights into how citizens' expectations on Brexit and its consequences are shaped in an increasingly digital world. It will inform organisations on how to communicate what is often dry and complex information related to Brexit in a credible, trustworthy and memorable way using digital communications. These insights will be essential for the strategic management, implementation and public communication of the Article 50 process for the UK's withdrawal from the EU. The question of what constitutes a fact (or an alternative fact) has perhaps never been more salient in public debate. The thirst for 'facts' during the Brexit referendum campaign was a key feature of public debate as was the question of whose facts count. The role of experts in the delivery of factual information came under close scrutiny and became a substantive feature of campaign dialogues. The question of trust and authority in information transmission has been under serious challenge. Citizens' expectations of Brexit and its consequences are, at least in part, shaped by their evaluation of the facts - but how do they decide what is a trustworthy fact? What factors lead them to imbue some sources of information with greater authority than others and under what circumstances do they choose to engage with, share or champion certain 'facts'? How does the context in which 'facts' are disseminated shape the expectations of the citizens on Brexit? Digital technology and online communication platforms such as Twitter and Facebook, play an increasingly important role in the public communication of both information and misinformation. To date, however, we have little information on how 'facts' transmitted in these digital platforms are internalized by recipients and on how this information impacts on citizens' expectations. We investigate how membership of a specific social media bubble impacts on the evaluation of the information received; how the status of the sender or even the content of the communication (whether it contains an image or a web link) matters; and how the nature of the information received, confirmatory or challenging of previous knowledge, impacts on fact transmission to different publics. This project builds on the extensive engagement of two research teams on Brexit-related research and with the UK in a Changing Europe team. Both teams are engaged at the highest level in stakeholder engagement and the project is built on a co-production model, ensuring that the issues addressed are of direct interest to those most likely to utilise the insights developed directly in their daily work. The project is designed in close collaboration with stakeholders to ensure that it can adapt swiftly to maintain relevance in the fast-moving Brexit environment. The project has access to a unique social media data-base of over 40 million tweets that NRlabs has collected on the Brexit debate since August 2015; the cutting edge skills and facilities for conducting experimental research at NRlabs; and ensures daily policy relevance through Full Fact's engagement, nationally and internationally, in the fact checking environment. The contribution of this project addresses the very heart of the mission of the UK in a Changing Europe programme - to be the authoritative source for independent research on UK-EU relations, underpinned by scientific excellence and generating and communicating innovative research with real world impact.

爱丁堡大学神经政治学研究实验室（NRlabs）和英国独立事实核查组织Full Fact之间的合作项目采用神经科学，心理学和行为学见解，帮助我们了解是什么使英国脱欧相关的主张在数字平台上传播。该项目利用大数据分析中的尖端科学技术，为公民对英国退欧及其后果的期望如何在日益数字化的世界中形成提供了新的见解。它将告知组织如何使用数字通信以可信，值得信赖和令人难忘的方式传达与英国脱欧相关的干燥和复杂的信息。这些见解对于英国退出欧盟的第50条程序的战略管理，实施和公共宣传至关重要。关于什么构成事实（或替代事实）的问题在公众辩论中可能从未如此突出。在英国退欧公投期间，对“事实”的渴望是公众辩论的一个关键特征，就像谁的事实更重要一样。专家在提供事实信息方面的作用受到了严格审查，并成为竞选对话的一个实质性特点。信息传递中的信任和权威问题受到严重挑战。公民对英国退欧及其后果的预期至少在一定程度上取决于他们对事实的评估--但他们如何决定什么是值得信赖的事实？是什么因素导致他们赋予某些信息来源比其他信息来源更大的权威？在什么情况下，他们选择参与、分享或支持某些“事实”？“事实”传播的背景如何塑造公民对英国退欧的期望？Twitter和Facebook等数字技术和在线通信平台在信息和错误信息的公共传播中发挥着越来越重要的作用。然而，到目前为止，我们几乎没有关于这些数字平台上传输的“事实”如何被接收者内化以及这些信息如何影响公民期望的信息。我们调查了特定社交媒体泡沫的成员资格如何影响对所收到信息的评估;发送者的状态甚至通信内容（无论是包含图像还是网络链接）如何重要;以及所收到信息的性质如何，确认或挑战先前的知识，影响事实传输到不同的公众。该项目建立在两个研究团队对Brexit相关研究的广泛参与以及与英国在不断变化的欧洲团队的广泛参与的基础上。这两个团队都在最高级别参与利益相关者的参与，该项目建立在联合生产模式的基础上，确保所解决的问题与那些最有可能在日常工作中直接利用见解的人直接相关。该项目的设计与利益相关者密切合作，以确保它能够迅速适应快速变化的英国退欧环境，以保持相关性。该项目可以访问NRlabs自2015年8月以来收集的关于英国脱欧辩论的超过4000万条推文的独特社交媒体数据库;在NRlabs进行实验研究的尖端技能和设施;并通过Full Fact在国内和国际上的参与确保日常政策相关性，在事实核查环境中。该项目的贡献解决了英国在不断变化的欧洲计划中的使命的核心-成为英国-欧盟关系独立研究的权威来源，以科学卓越为基础，并产生和传播具有真实的世界影响的创新研究。

项目成果

Russian Troll Hunting in a Brexit Twitter Archive

英国脱欧推特档案中的俄罗斯巨魔狩猎

• DOI: 10.1145/3197026.3203876
• 发表时间: 2018
• 作者: Llewellyn C

Fair Is Fair, or Is It? Territorial Identity Triggers Influence Ultimatum Game Behavior

• DOI: 10.1111/pops.12543
• 发表时间: 2018-12-01
• 期刊: POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY
• 影响因子: 4.6
• 作者: Cram, Laura;Moore, Adam;Suessenbach, Felix
• 通讯作者: Suessenbach, Felix

Answering Social Science Questions with Social media dat

用社交媒体数据回答社会科学问题

• 发表时间: 2018
• 作者: Llewellyn C

For Whom the Bell Trolls: Shifting Troll Behaviour in the Twitter Brexit Debate

钟声为谁而巨魔：推特脱欧辩论中巨魔行为的转变

• DOI: 10.1111/jcms.12882
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Journal of Common Market Studies
• 作者: Llewellyn C

Trust in information, political identity and the brain: an interdisciplinary fMRI study.

• DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2020.0140
• 发表时间: 2021-04-12
• 期刊: Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences
• 作者: Moore A;Hong S;Cram L
• 通讯作者: Cram L