The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
I do not believe you: how providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms
Abstract
Social media are often criticized as serving as a source of misinformation, but in this study we examine how they may also function to correct misperceptions on an emerging health issue. We use an experimental design to consider social correction that occurs via peers, testing both the type of correction (i.e., whether a source is provided or not) and the platform on which the correction ocratcurs (i.e., Facebook versus Twitter). Our results suggest that a source is necessary to correct misperceptions about the causes of the Zika virus on both Facebook and Twitter, but the mechanism by which such correction occurs differs across platforms. Implications for successful social media campaigns to address health misinformation are addressed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
Bornstein, M. H., & Gibson, J. J. (1980) · The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism · doi:10.2307/429816 · Cited by 22,935
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition
Gibson, J. J. (2014) · doi:10.4324/9781315740218 · Cited by 12,132
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · Cited by 9,939
Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612451018 · Cited by 2,920
The Persuasiveness of Source Credibility: A Critical Review of Five Decades' Evidence
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02547.x · Cited by 2,205 · cited 4×
“This makes sense from a theoretical perspective – provision of additional information should make that information seem more credible and thus make the argument more persuasive (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984; Pornpitakpan, 2004).”
BackgroundInfluentialPetty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.69 · Cited by 1,727 · cited 3×
“This makes sense from a theoretical perspective – provision of additional information should make that information seem more credible and thus make the argument more persuasive (Petty & Cacioppo, 1984; Pornpitakpan, 2004).”
BackgroundA postmodern Pandora's box: anti-vaccination misinformation on the internet
Kata, A. (2010) · Vaccine · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2009.12.022 · Cited by 1,208
Gauchat, G. (2012) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122412438225 · Cited by 1,091
Messing, S., & Westwood, S. J. (2014) · Communication Research · doi:10.1177/0093650212466406 · Cited by 902
Fox, J., & Moreland, J. J. (2015) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.083 · Cited by 763
Research works printed but not linked: 51
- 10.3855/jidc.8350 · DOI
- 10.1177/0956797615594620 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0007123415000186 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0002716214563923 · DOI
- 10.1111/jcom.12166 · DOI · Paper page
- Bode L., Health Communication
- 10.1007/s11109-006-9008-3 · DOI
- Bruns A., 2014, Twitter and society, 15
- Castillo, C., Mendoza, M. & Polete, B. (2011). Information credibility on Twitter. In WWW ’11 proceedings of the 20th international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 675–684). New York: ACM.
- 10.1177/1461444815616224 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1093/her/cys110 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.05.008 · DOI
- 10.1002/mar.4220120509 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.3758/s13423-011-0065-1 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.chb.2013.08.013 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/scin.5591820826 · DOI
- 10.1002/9781118426456.ch9 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/jcom.12108 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.electstud.2013.09.009 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2010.01401.x · DOI
- 10.1177/0002764211409378 · DOI · Paper page
- Hayes A., 2013, Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis
- 10.1177/0963662513480091 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1077699015606680 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0022381612000187 · DOI · Paper page
- Lyons B., Journal of Public Deliberation
- Maireder, A. & Ausserhofer, J. (2013). Political discourses on Twitter: Networking topics, objects and people (pp. 291–341). Twitter and Society. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
- 10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.002 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/1461444810365313 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2202/1540-8884.1354 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318279486b · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1136/bmj.g6178 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2008.00071.x · DOI
- 10.2196/publichealth.5059 · DOI
- 10.1111/ssqu.12102 · DOI
- 10.1177/1461444814535724 · DOI
- 10.1056/NEJMms1409003 · DOI
- Schrock A. R., 2015, International Journal of Communication, 9, 1229
- 10.1177/107769909607300415 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1080/1369118X.2011.554572 · DOI · Paper page
- Starbird, K., Maddock, J., Orand, M., Achterman, P. & Mason, R. M. (2014). Rumors, false flags, and digital vigilantes: Misinformation on Twitter after the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing. In iConference 2014 proceedings (pp. 654–662). Berlin, Germany.
- 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.vaccine.2013.11.006 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2012.756051 · DOI
- 10.1080/1369118X.2013.862563 · DOI
- 10.1111/comt.12087 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2139/ssrn.2129853 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.025 · DOI
- World Health Organization, 2016, World Health Organization
Cited by
Prevalence of health misinformation on social media: systematic review
Suarez-Lledo, V., & Alvarez-Galvez, J. (2021) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/17187 · Cited by 1,564
The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y · Cited by 1,372
Self-citationSocial Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization
Barberá, P. (2020) · Social Media and Democracy · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.004 · Cited by 373
Misinformation, Disinformation, and Online Propaganda
Guess, A. M., & Lyons, B. A. (2020) · Social Media and Democracy · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.003 · Cited by 284
Vraga, E. K., Kim, S. C., & Cook, J. (2019) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1080/08838151.2019.1653102 · Cited by 162
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L.
- Venue
- Information, Communication & Society
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2017-04-19
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1337-1353
- ISSN
- 1369-118X (ISSN-L)
- 1468-4462
- OpenAlex
- W2606128066
- Cited by
- 302
- References
- 12
- FWCI
- 60.80
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: I do not believe you: how providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/1369118x.2017.1313883
- The paper
- Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2018). I do not believe you: how providing a source corrects health misperceptions across social media platforms. Information, Communication & Society. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2017.1313883
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
