CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 150Misinformation and Its ImpactsLiteracy, Media, and EducationIslamic Finance and Communication

Effects of Disinformation Using Deepfake: The Protective Effect of Media Literacy Education

Hwang, Yoori, Ryu, Ji Youn, Jeong, Se-Hoon·2021·Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
DOI 10.1089/cyber.2020.0174
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This research examines (a) the negative impact of disinformation including a deepfake video and (b) the protective effect of media literacy education. We conducted an experiment using a two disinformation message type (deepfake video present vs. absent) by three media literacy education (general disinformation vs. deepfake-specific vs. no literacy) factorial design. In the general disinformation (vs. deepfake-specific) literacy condition, participants were informed about (a) the definition of disinformation (vs. deepfake), (b) some examples of disinformation (vs. deepfake), and (c) the social consequences of disinformation (vs. deepfake). Results showed that disinformation messages including a deepfake video resulted in greater vividness, persuasiveness, credibility, and intent to share the message. Media literacy education reduced the effects of disinformation messages.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1089/cyber.2020.0174

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • A consideration of the reputation of the information source, the involvement of trustworthy intermediaries such as experts and/or opinion leaders, and personal confidence based on first-hand experiences will further enhance consumers' protection.

    “A consideration of the reputation of the information source, the involvement of trustworthy intermediaries such as experts and/or opinion leaders, and personal confidence based on first-hand experiences will further enhance their protection (Hwang et al., 2021; Viviani & Pasi, 2017; Westerlund, 2019; Whittaker et al., 2020).”

    From Deepfakes: Deceptions, mitigations, and opportunities (2023) · cites this paper as Hwang et al., 2021

  • The problem is not only that deepfake technology is improving at a very fast pace; it is that the social processes through which we collectively acquire knowledge and determine whether something is genuine or deceptive are under threat and that the very definition of reality is a critical concern.

    “The problem is not only that deepfake technology is improving at a very fast pace (Johnson & Diakopoulos, 2021; Schwartz, 2018); it is that the social processes through which we collectively acquire knowledge and determine whether something is genuine or deceptive are under threat and that the very definition of reality is a critical concern (Hwang et al., 2021; Schwartz, 2018).”

    From Deepfakes: Deceptions, mitigations, and opportunities (2023) · cites this paper as Hwang et al., 2021

  • Hwang et al. (2021) found that a fake news article with a deepfake was perceived as more persuasive, more vivid, more credible, and led to higher sharing intentions than the same article without the deepfake.

    “Results suggest that the fake news article with deepfake was perceived to be more persuasive, more vivid, more credible, and led to higher sharing intentions than the fake news article without the deepfake.”

    From The detection of political deepfakes (2022) · cites this paper as Hwang et al., 2021

  • Prior studies are in line with the assumption that deepfakes shape recipients' thoughts and behavior and that deepfakes may warrant information in a fake news article.

    “They are further in line with the assumption that deepfakes shape recipients' thoughts and behavior (Dobber et al., 2021;Hwang et al., 2021) and that deepfakes may warrant information in a fake news article (Hwang et al., 2021).”

    From The detection of political deepfakes (2022) · cites this paper as Hwang et al., 2021

  • Results on the effectiveness of treatments meant to foster critical scrutiny were mixed.

    “Results on the effectiveness of treatments meant to foster critical scrutiny were mixed (Hwang et al., 2021;Ko ¨bis et al., 2021).”

    From The detection of political deepfakes (2022) · cites this paper as Hwang et al., 2021

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Hwang, Y., Ryu, J. Y., & Jeong, S.-H.
Affiliations
  • Myongji University (KR)
  • Korea University (KR)
Corresponding author
Jeong, Se-Hoon
ORCID
Venue
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2021-03-01
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
188-193
ISSN
  • 2152-2715 (ISSN-L)
  • 2152-2723
DOI
10.1089/cyber.2020.0174
OpenAlex
W3135235202
Cited by
148
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 40 · 2024: 37 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 5
FWCI
28.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.liebertpub.com/nv/resources-tools/text-and-data-mining-policy/121/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Cyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Literacy, Media, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Islamic Finance and Communication
Keywords
disinformation, deepfake videos, media literacy education, message credibility, message persuasiveness, sharing intention
MeSH terms
Communication, Female, Humans, Deception, Male, Persuasive Communication, Video Recording, Intention, Consumer Health Information, Young Adult, Health Literacy, Social Media

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