Fighting Misinformation: Where Are We and Where to Go?

Nguyen, H.N.; Lydia, Ogbadu-Oladapo; Ali, Irhamni; Chen, Haihua; Chen, Jiangping

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-28035-1_27

Cited by 5 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 111 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The result indicates that 102 articles (37.4%) were published in 2022, followed by 2021 (55 or 20.1%), 2020 (28 or 10.3%), and 2019 (25 or 9.2%). The results are consistent with those by Nguyen et al (2023). Research on misinformation is still attracting a lot of attention from researchers in different disciplines.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 94%

“…The concept of Misinformation also has different definitions or other names. It is defined as “false information (Fetzer, 2004), inaccurate information (Karlova & Lee, 2011), as a virus (Spinney, 2019; Smith & Bastian, 2022), and as “articles that are intentionally and verifiably false, and could mislead readers” (Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017)” (Nguyen et al, 2023, p. 2). Although misinformation and disinformation are often misunderstood, misused, or even used interchangeably (Allen & Zimmerman, 2022), they are different.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although misinformation and disinformation are often misunderstood, misused, or even used interchangeably (Allen & Zimmerman, 2022), they are different. However, misinformation, disinformation, rumor, or fake news share the wrong message(s) that can mislead with adverse consequences (Nguyen et al, 2023; Wu et al, 2019) and can be much worse when it relates to health, senior adults, and children. Therefore, this study focuses solely on misinformation as an umbrella term, and the essential characteristics of misinformation include that it is not true and may lead to serious, negative consequences when it is believed or spread.…”

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies investigating the spread and impact of misinformation apply theories in multiple disciplines to guide the investigation. Nguyen et al (2023) conducted a content analysis of 151 articles in the library and information science domain. While around 39% of the articles did not use theories, more than 40 theories, models, and frameworks have been applied in these studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An Investigation of the Use of Theories in Misinformation Studies

Ogbadu‐Oladapo,

Chung,

et al. 2023

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper examines social science and humanity theories that have been applied to studies dealing with misinformation. We identified 273 articles published from 2012 to 2023 from Web of Science, Scopus, and ScienceDirect. These articles are empirical studies that have applied one or more social science or humanity theories. Applying content analysis approach, we identified 124 theories that authors have used in their studies. These theories belong to different disciplines or fields, such as political science, psychology, communication, sociology, and economics. We discuss the top 11 theories and how they have been used to understand misinformation and its impacts. This study provides insights into understanding current misinformation studies and rich resources for information evaluation and information literacy education.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An Investigation of the Use of Theories in Misinformation Studies

Ogbadu‐Oladapo,

Chung,

et al. 2023

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Tech

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although false information on health matters has received limited attention in information science, the Covid‐19 pandemic has prompted an increase in research on the impact of false information on health (Nguyen et al, 2023). The Covid‐19 pandemic, which began in 2020, has brought the issue of false health information to the forefront of public consciousness, making it relevant to all members of society.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring Information Behavior Patterns in Response to False and Misleading Health Information

Bressel,

Dewitz,

Greifeneder

2023

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

False information, also known as misinformation or disinformation, has long been a serious concern in health information behavior research. The phenomenon of false information in health information behavior is complex and multifaceted, and it involves a range of factors related to the production, dissemination, and consumption of health information. This paper aims to understand through which channels people receive false health information and which information behavior patterns exist towards this kind of information. Based on 21 qualitative semi‐structured interviews with interactive and visual participative elements, five patterns of health information behavior towards the receivement of false health information were identified. Further, a strong relationship between these patterns, the context in which false health information was encountered, and the information source was observed. Additionally, two specific information behavior patterns (information avoidance and intentional non‐information behavior) as well as the urgency and impact of false information on the health of individuals and society, were identified as potential drivers for the dissemination of false health information.

show abstract

Are Prompts All You Need?: Chatting with ChatGPT on Disinformation Policy Understanding

Chen,

Cherukuri,

Zhu

et al. 2024

Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ChatGPT has shown promise in assisting qualitative researchers with coding. Previous efforts have primarily focused on datasets derived from interviews and observations, leaving document analysis, another crucial data source, relatively unexplored. In this project, we address the rapidly emerging topic of disinformation regulatory policy as a pilot to investigate ChatGPT's potential for document analysis. We adapt our existing qualitative research framework, which identifies five key components of disinformation policy: context, actors, issue, instrument, and channel, to sketch out policy documents. We then designed a two‐stage experiment employing a multi‐layer workflow using a dataset with highly relevant policy documents from US federal government departments. Through iteratively developing and refining six different prompt strategies, we identified an effective few‐shot learning strategy that achieved 72.0% accuracy and a 70.8% F‐score with the optimal prompt. Our experimental process and outcomes explore the feasibility of using ChatGPT to support manual coding for policy documents and suggest a coding approach for conducting explicit document analysis through an interactive process between researchers and ChatGPT. Furthermore, our results initiate a wider debate on how to integrate human logic with ChatGPT logic, along with the evolving relationship between researchers and AI tools.

show abstract

Fighting Misinformation: Where Are We and Where to Go?

Cited by 5 publications

References 111 publications

An Investigation of the Use of Theories in Misinformation Studies

An Investigation of the Use of Theories in Misinformation Studies

Exploring Information Behavior Patterns in Response to False and Misleading Health Information

Are Prompts All You Need?: Chatting with ChatGPT on Disinformation Policy Understanding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About