误传
可靠性
众包
来源可信度
政治
考试(生物学)
差异(会计)
社会心理学
心理学
计算机科学
政治学
法学
万维网
计算机安全
经济
古生物学
会计
生物
作者
Myojung Chung,Won-Ki Moon,S. Mo Jones-Jang
标识
DOI:10.1080/21670811.2023.2254820
摘要
While fact-checking has received much attention as a tool to fight misinformation online, fact-checking efforts have yielded limited success in combating political misinformation due to partisans’ biased information processing. The efficacy of fact-checking often decreases, if not backfires, when the fact-checking messages contradict individual audiences’ political stance. To explore ways to minimize such politically biased processing of fact-checking messages, an online experiment (N = 645) examined how different source labels of fact-checking messages (human experts vs. AI vs. crowdsourcing vs. human experts-AI hybrid) influence partisans’ processing of fact-checking messages. Results showed that AI and crowdsourcing source labels significantly reduced motivated reasoning in evaluating the credibility of fact-checking messages whereas the partisan bias remained evident for the human experts and human experts-AI hybrid source labels.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI