Measuring Misinformation in Video Search Platforms: An Audit Study on YouTube

Hussein, Eslam; Juneja, Prerna; Mitra, Tanushree

doi:10.1145/3392854

Cited by 167 publications

(151 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

137

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…YouTube recently vowed to limit recommending conspiracy theories on its platform (Wong & Levin, 2019), a move that highlights the tech industry's unilateral power to shape their users' information diets. In a recent empirical audit of You-Tube recommendations, Hussein, Juneja, and Mitra (2020) found that the YouTube approach indeed limited recommendations of selected conspiracy theories (e.g., the flat-earth narrative) or medical misinformation (videos promoting vaccine hesitancy), but not of other misinformation topics (e.g., the chemtrail conspiracy narrative).…”

Section: Fraud Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools

Kozyreva

Lewandowsky

Hertwig

2020

Psychol Sci Public Interest

249

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Internet has evolved into a ubiquitous and indispensable digital environment in which people communicate, seek information, and make decisions. Despite offering various benefits, online environments are also replete with smart, highly adaptive choice architectures designed primarily to maximize commercial interests, capture and sustain users’ attention, monetize user data, and predict and influence future behavior. This online landscape holds multiple negative consequences for society, such as a decline in human autonomy, rising incivility in online conversation, the facilitation of political extremism, and the spread of disinformation. Benevolent choice architects working with regulators may curb the worst excesses of manipulative choice architectures, yet the strategic advantages, resources, and data remain with commercial players. One way to address some of this imbalance is with interventions that empower Internet users to gain some control over their digital environments, in part by boosting their information literacy and their cognitive resistance to manipulation. Our goal is to present a conceptual map of interventions that are based on insights from psychological science. We begin by systematically outlining how online and offline environments differ despite being increasingly inextricable. We then identify four major types of challenges that users encounter in online environments: persuasive and manipulative choice architectures, AI-assisted information architectures, false and misleading information, and distracting environments. Next, we turn to how psychological science can inform interventions to counteract these challenges of the digital world. After distinguishing among three types of behavioral and cognitive interventions—nudges, technocognition, and boosts—we focus on boosts, of which we identify two main groups: (a) those aimed at enhancing people’s agency in their digital environments (e.g., self-nudging, deliberate ignorance) and (b) those aimed at boosting competencies of reasoning and resilience to manipulation (e.g., simple decision aids, inoculation). These cognitive tools are designed to foster the civility of online discourse and protect reason and human autonomy against manipulative choice architectures, attention-grabbing techniques, and the spread of false information.

show abstract

Section: Fraud Detectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools

Kozyreva

Lewandowsky

Hertwig

2020

Psychol Sci Public Interest

249

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An analysis of 1,300 Facebook pages during the 2019 measles outbreak found anti-vaxx pages grew by 500%, compared to 50% of pro-vaccine pages (16). Individuals can also end in echo chambers; once a YouTube user develops a watch history, a filter bubble tailors their Top 5 and Up-Next recommendations, with watching videos promoting vaccine misinformation leading to more misinformed recommendations (17).…”

Section: Trust Threat and Information Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Individuals can also end in echo chambers; once a YouTube user develops a watch history, a filter bubble tailors their Top 5 and Up-Next recommendations, with watching videos promoting vaccine misinformation leading to more misinformed recommendations (17).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of trust and social media echo chambers predict COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

Jennings

Stoker

Willis

et al. 2021

Preprint

126

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As COVID-19 vaccines are rolled out across the world, there are growing concerns about the role that trust, belief in conspiracy theories and spread of misinformation through social media impact vaccine hesitancy. We use a nationally representative survey of 1,476 adults in the UK between December 12 to 18, 2020 and five focus groups conducted in the same period. Trust is a core predictor, with distrust in vaccines in general and mistrust in government raising vaccine hesitancy. Trust in health institutions and experts and perceived personal threat are vital, with focus groups revealing that COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy is driven by a misunderstanding of herd immunity as providing protection, fear of rapid vaccine development and side effects, belief the virus is man- made and related to population control. Particularly those who obtain information from relatively unregulated social media sources such as YouTube that have recommendations tailored by watch history are less likely to be willing to become vaccinated. Those who hold general conspiratorial beliefs are less willing to be vaccinated. Since an increasing number of individuals use social media for gathering health information, interventions require action from governments, health officials and social media companies. More attention needs to help people understand their own risks, unpack complex concepts and fill knowledge voids.

show abstract

“…Over 65% of YouTube’s content about vaccines seems to be about discouraging their use—focusing on autism, adverse reactions, or mercury content 11. And search algorithms promote content similar to what users have previously watched, leading people into increasingly narrow echo chambers of disinformation 12. A recent UK study found that users who relied on social media for their information, particularly YouTube, were significantly less willing to be vaccinated 13…”

Section: Yes—melinda Millsmentioning

confidence: 99%