Cited by 119Library Science and Information LiteracyLiteracy, Media, and EducationEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

Believing the Unbelievable: Understanding Young People's Information Literacy Beliefs and Practices in the United States

Open access
Metzger, Miriam J., Flanagin, Andrew J., Markov, Alex, Grossman, Rebekah, Bulger, Monica·2015·Journal of Children and Media

Abstract

Young people are increasingly turning to the Internet more than to traditional media and information sources to find information. Yet, research demonstrates suboptimal online information literacy among youth today, suggesting potential shortcomings in young people's information consumption behaviors. To assess this, this study investigates several predictors of young people's success in online information evaluation, including their awareness of credibility problems associated with digital information, their use of specific information evaluation practices, and their accuracy in credibility assessment. Results from a study of 2,747 11–18-year-old Internet users indicate both expected and surprising influences of young people's cognitive development, decision-making style, demographic background, and digital information literacy training on their information evaluation awareness, skills, and practices. Theoretical implications and those for redesigning online information literacy interventions are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/17482798.2015.1056817

Cites

69 of 69 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a national survey of youth aged 11-18, students who reported discussing credibility evaluation with parents or teachers were more likely to believe a hoax website.

    “In a national survey of youth aged 11-18, Metzger et al. (2015) found that students who reported discussing credibility evaluation with parents or teachers were more likely to believe a hoax website.”

    From The Promises, Challenges, and Futures of Media Literacy (2018) · cites this paper as Metzger et al. (2015)

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 76 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Markov, A., Grossman, R., & Bulger, M.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Santa Barbara (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Venue
Journal of Children and Media
Published
2015-07-03
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
325-348
ISSN
  • 1748-2798 (ISSN-L)
  • 1748-2801
OpenAlex
W1958308845
Cited by
119
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3
FWCI
29.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Journal of Children and Media (publishedVersion)
Funders
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Library Science and Information Literacy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Literacy, Media, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
information literacy, youth, online information evaluation, credibility assessment, digital information literacy, cognitive development, decision-making styles, demographic factors, information literacy training, online information sources

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