The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 21 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media
Open accessAbstract
In the so called 'post-truth' era, characterized by a loss of public trust in various institutions, and the rise of 'fake news' disseminated via the internet and social media, individuals may face uncertainty about the veracity of information available, whether it be satire or malicious hoax. We investigate attitudes to news delivered by social media, and subsequent verification strategies applied, or not applied, by individuals. A survey reveals that two thirds of respondents regularly consumed news via Facebook, and that one third had at some point come across fake news that they initially believed to be true. An analysis task involving news presented via Facebook reveals a diverse range of judgement forming strategies, with participants relying on personal judgements as to plausibility and scepticism around sources and journalistic style. This reflects a shift away from traditional methods of accessing the news, and highlights the difficulties in combating the spread of fake news.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This paper combines a UK survey and a think-aloud Facebook-feed study to examine how people consume news via social media and judge whether stories are fake. It finds that news consumption via Facebook is common, many have believed fake news before later recognizing it, and participants used varied, inconsistent strategies—source reputation, content plausibility, and personal interest—rather than a single verification method.
Key findings
- Survey (309 UK respondents, May 2017): 65% accessed news via Facebook feeds at least once a day, but only 20% obtained “most” of their news via Facebook; 37% had believed a news story true then later realized it was exaggerated, inaccurate, or blatantly false; 46% had immediately identified an item as fake.
- In the survey, 61% went through to read the full story; among those who read the article in full or part, only 55% believed the headline accurately matched the content.
- The think-aloud study (9 participants, 13 news posts) found no single consistent strategy: participants judged veracity by source reliability (e.g., BBC/CNN trusted, unknown or satirical sources distrusted), content plausibility and prior knowledge, and journalistic style, author, and date.
- Personal interest strongly shaped engagement: participants often ignored or scrolled past stories they found irrelevant, even when tasked to find fake news, and some deliberately sought out fake stories.
Methods
- Descriptive online survey advertised via an online survey tool and snowballed from institutional mailing lists; 309 UK respondents completed it in May 2017 (41.1% male, 55.7% female; 70.4% aged 18–25; 71% students).
- Think-aloud study with 9 participants (5 female, 4 male; aged 19–40, mean 27) browsing a fictitious Facebook account “Leo Porter” populated with 13 manually selected real and fake news posts; asked to “find the fake news” while thinking aloud, followed by semi-structured interviews.
- Qualitative thematic analysis of transcripts and screen recordings; one researcher coded initially, themes were discussed, and a second researcher re-ran the data focusing on those themes.
Limitations
- Stated: small sample, locality, and limited realism; participants browsed a created profile rather than their own Facebook, lacking familiar social context; the task slowed normal browsing pace; findings are not broadly generalizable.
- Stated: UK-only survey/study context; future research is needed in wider, more naturalistic settings, ideally through audience ethnographies.
- Evident from the text: survey recruitment via snowballing from institutional mailing lists and a predominantly student sample (71%) may bias the survey; the qualitative study’s n=9 further limits generalizability.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
75 Own result · 23 Own interpretation · 13 Not checked yet · 8 No basis given · 6 Own method
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, 46% of respondents highlighted 'new information' referring to a current event as an important factor, while 20% referred to news being 'factual', 'accurate' or 'something of interest'.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably 65% of respondents reported accessing news via their Facebook feeds (i.e.shared by friends, subscriptions to news agencies, suggested automatically by Facebook) at least once a day; however only 20% obtained 'most' of their news via Facebook.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“A survey reveals that two thirds of respondents regularly consumed news via Facebook, and that one third had at some point come across fake news that they initially believed to be true.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plainn = 309- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conversely, 46% had come across a news item they immediately identified as fake, principally based on knowledge of the source as satire -'The Onion', 'Daily Mash', or being known to exaggerate -'because it was the Daily Mail', or again through their own reasoning and judgements of plausibility.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Conversely, 46% had come across a news item they immediately identified as fake, principally based on knowledge of the source as satire -'The Onion', 'Daily Mash', or being known to exaggerate -'because it was the Daily Mail', or again through their own reasoning and judgements of plausibility.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here respondents stated that they identified the piece of news in question as fake predominantly by fact-checking against other sources, or using their own reasoning that something either could not be true or seemed implausible.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably 65% of respondents reported accessing news via their Facebook feeds (i.e.shared by friends, subscriptions to news agencies, suggested automatically by Facebook) at least once a day; however only 20% obtained 'most' of their news via Facebook.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plainn = 309- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When asked to describe factors that were used to determine whether a post, article or link seen on social media was news or not, respondents referred to information coming from a source that they considered to be 'reputable', many including the BBC, and others referencing 'mainstream TV news channels or broadsheet newspapers' including The Guardian, Reuters and CNN.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“37% of respondents had come across a news story, believed it to be true, then later realized that it was either exaggerated, inaccurate or blatantly false.”
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
“A survey reveals that two thirds of respondents regularly consumed news via Facebook, and that one third had at some point come across fake news that they initially believed to be true.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § Abstract · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Their concerns about such a tool were determined by whether they saw it using crowdbased verification of news or whether it was authoritative or algorithmic flagging of fake news.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Solutions to Fake News
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, some instances showed participants to fully rely on the authority of the source to make judgments on whether the story is true.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Veracity based on source reliability
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 25
- Probably not a substantial claim. 33
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants looked for grains of truth in all places and often chose to accept parts of a story that they felt happy to believe regardless of how incredible or humorous the story was.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Veracity based on the content
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants indicated interest in stories that were clearly false, with some participants deliberately seeking out those fake stories in their own Facebook feeds.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > "Celebrities don't interest me. [pause] I don't know what to make of it" P9
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ultimately, this is believed to have led to the undermining the usefulness of social media as a delivery tool in general.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many participants have gotten used to the idea of parody news sites, and to them particularly funny headlines were immediate signs of a fake story.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Veracity based on the content
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were 309 respondents who completed the survey in May 2017.41.1% male, 55.7% female, and respondents' ages ranged from 18-25 to over 66, however the majority were in the 18-25 bracket (70.4%).Respondents predominantly identified themselves as being students (71%).All were from the UK.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plainn = 309- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To some, fake news was written by playful or bored individuals with no intent to cause harm”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At worst, they were seen as false stories written to shape the views of unsuspecting readers by stirring up opinions or influencing their decision-making.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was the obvious concern that fake news may influence people's opinions.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three categories of behaviours emerged.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Veracity based on source reliability
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Others worried that fake news will make it more and more difficult to find the truth, especially when appearing incidentally alongside the other traffic of a social media feed.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An analysis task involving news presented via Facebook reveals a diverse range of judgement forming strategies, with participants relying on personal judgements as to plausibility and scepticism around sources and journalistic style.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The fictitious Facebook account and news posts mirror the sort of news feed users encounter day to day.
- Rests on an assumption: Participants' think-aloud and interview responses reflect their everyday practices when engaging with news.
- Rests on an assumption: The 13 news posts selected are representative of real and fake news encountered on social media.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The third observed behaviour was when participants relied purely on their own assessment while either completely ignoring the source or acknowledging whether or not it was reliable and choosing not to take that into account.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Veracity based on source reliability
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Lack of knowledge of a source is seen as an indicator of fakeness, although can lead to further attempts to form an opinion on the general tenor of the source based on layout, writing style and other articles.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here the most popular were breaking news (69%), politics (45%), international (42%) and entertainment (40%).”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A second group of participants however took the lack of truth in the article as being secondary to the definition of fake news, with the primary element being the intent behind it.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nine participants, five female and four male, took part in the study, recruited locally via social media.The participants were aged between 19 and 40 (mean 27), education ranging from vocational training to post-graduate degree, professions including administrative, engineering and teaching, however from broadly similar socio-economic backgrounds.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > METHODOLOGY
plainn = 9- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the case of crowdsourced news verification, one participant worried that the crowd might just not be able to separate their own opinions from the question of whether news is fake”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Solutions to Fake News
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants appeared to initially draw conclusions based on what we may term formal characteristics, such as considering the generally deemed reliability of a source URL, but also criteria that were more substantive insofar as they sought to judge content per se.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One questioned how that would even work as only a handful of news items are fully verifiable and questions where one would draw the line.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Solutions to Fake News
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The lack of interest in a story that is seen as false was in this case a hindrance: as the story itself was true (a story about cows being fed Skittles candy), but the participant did not deem it worthy of investigation because it didn't seem likely.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > "Doesn't interest me (…) blatantly not going to be true." P8
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They described different ways a story might be fake, with the most straightforward being that a fake story was one that is based on something true, but containing falsehoods.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“while others were warier of the people behind fake news and described them at best as attempts to appeal to a specific audience.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“While”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Reflections on Fake News
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] source
hedged- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this regard, the source was seen as the entity that was either truthful or not, and there was little consideration of the fact that the news could be re-reported several times from multiple sources with different editorial slants.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This paper has shown, through an online survey and study, that social media users are aware of and encountering what can be characterised as”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > CONCLUSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Firstly, one may consider repeated invocations of what 'interests' a reader as a determinant of their online news selection.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > The Politics of Social News Consumption
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our survey respondents and study participants were all able to speak to what they considered to be the type of news they consumed via social media and what they tended to like, dislike and value.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Fake News and Echo Chambers
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Those having high exposure to 'fake news' in the form of political televisual satire, combined with low exposure to 'hard' news, lend more credibility to 'fake news' than those with high levels of exposure to both 'fake' and 'hard' news [2].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > RELATED WORK
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The speed and volume at which news appears makes it difficult to scale manual fact-checking processes, and drives a need for automated support in verifying content [7,22,25].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Information Literacy and Echo Chambers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7]
- Not checked yetcites [22] source
- Not checked yetcites [25]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A single researcher performed an initial analysis by coding transcriptions of each participant's activities, identifying key points in which the participants differed.These were discussed and broken up into themes, before a second researcher performed a second run of the data focusing on these themes and themes and highlighting evidence of their emergence.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > METHODOLOGY
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The empirically strongest claims to emerge from our studies relate to the variety of interpretative and argumentative positions which our participants were seen to take when faced with a piece of news presented in a Facebook feed, and the diversity of strategies employed when consuming and arriving at a subsequent judgement on each news article.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our survey results suggest that social media users are not only incidentally consuming news via sites such as Facebook, but they are aware of -and encountering -fake news, some of which is taken at face value.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > SURVEYING SOCIAL MEDIA NEWS CONSUMPTION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The survey respondents are representative of social media news consumers.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It becomes clear that there is no single strategy that an individual reader employs consistently across all news articles while inspecting them, and the process by which judgements are made is highly variable.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The apparent, formal, source of an article is an important part of the verification process.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The posts appeared in the same visual format as if they had been posted or shared by a normal user, as shown in figure 1, displaying an image, headline and sub headline, and source.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > METHODOLOGY
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“13 news posts were manually selected from among those reported in the survey as stories encountered by participants on social media.They were chosen to provide a mixture of real and fake news, including obviously mundane but also implausible real news, and fake news from a number of sources again following Rubin's [27] typology of satire, exaggeration and hoax, from the mundane to the unusual:”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > METHODOLOGY
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Moreover fake news across the spectrum, even the most innocuous satire, has arguably [3,14,15] also led to increasingly blurred lines between what is seen as real news and what is seen as fake, resulting in a gradual decline of trust in traditional real, or 'hard' news sources [16].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > RELATED WORK
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This directly supports the notion that technology should augment rather than replace human judgement [11,31].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Information Literacy and Echo Chambers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11]
- Not checked yetcites [31] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The length of this process is primarily driven by reported personal interest -veracity is seemingly irrelevant regardless as to whether it is clearly satire, exaggeration or in fact true.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, tools that are opaque in their implementation risk introducing another layer of trust disruption and perceived bias.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Information Literacy and Echo Chambers
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A further confounding factor that drives the length to which a participant would take their investigation is their level of personal interest in the story itself.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Mechanics of judgement and consumption
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The 'interest' invoked appears highly individualized and (superficially) apolitical, thereby roughly corresponding to some bleak but influential sociological accounts of the contemporary era as a time of hyper-individualism and depoliticizing, uncritical consumerism (see, for example, [30][4]).”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > The Politics of Social News Consumption
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30][4]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“This is in line with the position that, when it comes to fake news, technology should augment rather than replace human judgement [11,31].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Fake News and Echo Chambers
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11]
- Not checked yetcites [31] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is important to note that there are several limitations to our study, specifically in terms of sample size, locality and realism of the scenario, and as such we are careful not to attempt to draw broad generalisations on how the public at large may consume news online.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Limitations of our study
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This awareness of fake news can be described as much less 'consumerist' but as oriented towards concerns with public debate and the challenge of disentangling rational and pervasive claims from ideological distortions and selfinterested misrepresentations [13].”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > The Politics of Social News Consumption
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Crowdsourced tools that would flag news stories as being true or false are susceptible to the same echo chamber effect as the news stories themselves, where individuals would reinforce truths that fit their narratives and shed doubt on those that do not, regardless of their veracity.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Fake News and Echo Chambers
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Echo chambers exist and fake news can exacerbate their effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The notion among our participants that the truth is being lost amidst a stream of falsehoods and opinions parading as fact highlights a real concern for the wellbeing of public discourse.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > The Politics of Social News Consumption
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The aforementioned 'scoring' of the veracity of news articles would seemingly suffer from a similar uncertainty.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Challenging Established Hierarchies of Trustworthiness
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fake news that supports a certain narrative often stands unchallenged within the echo chamber since evidence of its falsities would not find its way into the bubble.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Fake News and Echo Chambers
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Echo chambers exist and fake news can exacerbate their effects.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These issues appear to be exacerbated by the indiscriminate mixing of a multitude of pieces of information in an 'average' social media feed.”
§ Falling for Fake News: Investigating the Consumption of News via Social Media > Challenging Established Hierarchies of Trustworthiness
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper relies on this without support.
The fictitious Facebook account and news posts mirror the sort of news feed users encounter day to day.
“We constructed a fictitious Facebook account belonging to 'Leo Porter' to mirror the sort of news feed that users might encounter day to day whilst using their own Facebook account.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Participants' think-aloud and interview responses reflect their everyday practices when engaging with news.
“Our aim was to prompt participants to draw upon and elucidate their everyday practices when engaging with news in this manner.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 13 news posts selected are representative of real and fake news encountered on social media.
“13 news posts were manually selected from among those reported in the survey as stories encountered by participants on social media.They were chosen to provide a mixture of real and fake news, including obviously mundane but also implausible real news, and fake news from a number of sources again following Rubin's [27] typology of satire, exaggeration and hoax, from the mundane to the unusual:”
The paper relies on this without support.
The survey respondents are representative of social media news consumers.
“Our survey results suggest that social media users are not only incidentally consuming news via sites such as Facebook, but they are aware of -and encountering -fake news, some of which is taken at face value.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Echo chambers exist and fake news can exacerbate their effects.
“Our current discussion however is not about whether echo chambers are real or new, nor is it about how to address them.”
“how fake news might have exacerbated the effects of those chambers”
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 the citing paper
“In a number of studies, transparency has involved presenting information alongside the URL of the original source, which signifcantly increased people's trust in that information [5,13,24,25,40,109].”
From What Do We Mean When We Talk about Trust in Social Media? A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
Cites
The theory of communicative action
Edgar, A. (2014) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315710495-5 · Cited by 8,669
Information credibility on twitter
Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., & Poblete, B. (2011) · Proceedings of the 20th international conference on World wide web · doi:10.1145/1963405.1963500 · Cited by 2,593
Automatic deception detection: Methods for finding fake news
Conroy, N. K., Rubin, V. L., & Chen, Y. (2015) · Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/pra2.2015.145052010082 · Cited by 1,066
Social bots distort the 2016 U.S. Presidential election online discussion
Bessi, A., & Ferrara, E. (2016) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v21i11.7090 · Cited by 993
Detection and Resolution of Rumours in Social Media: A Survey
Zubiaga, A., Aker, A., Bontcheva, K., Liakata, M., & Procter, R. (2019) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3161603 · Cited by 862 · cited 2×
“providing users with answers about what’s right and what’s wrong, which has been shown to risk simply being ignored by users [32], but rather in empowering them to make this decision for themselves with as much support as possible.”
BackgroundThe Theory of Communicative Action
(2001) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/1955.003.0004 · Cited by 696
Deception detection for news: Three types of fakes
Rubin, V. L., Chen, Y., & Conroy, N. K. (2015) · Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/pra2.2015.145052010083 · Cited by 558
Chen, Y., Conroy, N. J., & Rubin, V. L. (2015) · WMDD@ICMI · doi:10.1145/2823465.2823467 · Cited by 434
The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Volume I: The Rise of the Network Society
Schneider, P. A., & Castells, M. (1997) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.2307/1252090 · Cited by 413
Volkova, S., Shaffer, K., Jang, J. Y., & Hodas, N. (2017) · Proceedings of the 55th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 2: Short Papers) · doi:10.18653/v1/p17-2102 · Cited by 381
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Khan, M. L., & Idris, I. K. (2019) · Behaviour and Information Technology · doi:10.1080/0144929x.2019.1578828 · Cited by 342
Fake News on Facebook and Twitter: Investigating How People (Don't) Investigate
Geeng, C., Yee, S., & Roesner, F. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376784 · Cited by 169
Majerczak, P., & Strzelecki, A. (2022) · Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.3390/bs12020051 · Cited by 171
Using Blockchain to Rein in the New Post-Truth World and Check the Spread of Fake News
Qayyum, A., Qadir, J., Janjua, M. U., & Sher, F. (2019) · IT Professional · doi:10.1109/mitp.2019.2910503 · Cited by 130
Liu, P. L. (2021) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113928 · Cited by 122
Jahanbakhsh, F., Zhang, A. X., Berinsky, A. J., Pennycook, G., Rand, D. G., & Karger, D. R. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3449092 · Cited by 112
Secure and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence-extended Reality (AI-XR) for Metaverses
Qayyum, A., Butt, M. A., Ali, H. M., Usman, M., Halabi, O., Al‐Fuqaha, A., Abbasi, Q. H., Imran, M. A., & Qadir, J. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3614426 · Cited by 117
AngleKindling: Supporting Journalistic Angle Ideation with Large Language Models
Petridis, S., Diakopoulos, N., Crowston, K., Hansen, M., Henderson, K., Jastrzebski, S., Nickerson, J. V., & Chilton, L. B. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3580907 · Cited by 98
Practicing Information Sensibility: How Gen Z Engages with Online Information
Hassoun, A., Beacock, I., Consolvo, S., Goldberg, B., Kelley, P. G., & Russell, D. M. (2023) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581328 · Cited by 92
Kirchner, J., & Reuter, C. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415211 · Cited by 91
Combating Misinformation in Bangladesh
Haque, M. M., Yousuf, M., Alam, A. S., Saha, P., Ahmed, S. I., & Hassan, N. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3415201 · Cited by 98
DEAP-FAKED: Knowledge Graph based Approach for Fake News Detection
Mayank, M., Sharma, S., & Sharma, R. R. (2022) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) · doi:10.1109/asonam55673.2022.10068653 · Cited by 93
Consuming Fake News: A Matter of Age? The Perception of Political Fake News Stories in Facebook Ads
Loos, E. F., & Nijenhuis, J. (2020) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-50232-4_6 · Cited by 79
The persuasive effects of social cues and source effects on misinformation susceptibility
Traberg, C. S., Harjani, T., Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2024) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-024-54030-y · Cited by 68
Different Absorption from the Same Sharing: Sifted Multi-task Learning for Fake News Detection
Wu, L., Rao, Y., Jin, H., Nazir, A., & Sun, L. (2019) · Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP) · doi:10.18653/v1/d19-1471 · Cited by 69
Validated digital literacy measures for populations with low levels of internet experiences
Ali, A., Raza, A. A., & Qazi, I. A. (2023) · Development Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.deveng.2023.100107 · Cited by 67
Typology and Mechanisms of Media Manipulation
(2020) · International Journal of Media and Information Literacy · doi:10.13187/ijmil.2020.1.69 · Cited by 58
SoK: Content Moderation in Social Media, from Guidelines to Enforcement, and Research to Practice
Singhal, M., Ling, C., Paudel, P., Thota, P., Kumarswamy, N., Stringhini, G., & Nilizadeh, S. (2023) · 2023 IEEE 8th European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P) · doi:10.1109/eurosp57164.2023.00056 · Cited by 57
Understanding Online News Behaviors
Bentley, F. R., Quehl, K., Wirfs-Brock, J., & Bica, M. (2019) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3290605.3300820 · Cited by 67
Hadlington, L., Harkin, L., Kuss, D. J., Newman, K. L., & Ryding, C. (2022) · Psychology of Popular Media · doi:10.1037/ppm0000387 · Cited by 53
Freire, P. M. S., da Silva, F. R. M., & Goldschmidt, R. R. (2021) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115414 · Cited by 48
Online Social Deception and Its Countermeasures: A Survey
Guo, Z. Y., Cho, J.-H., Chen, I.-R., Sengupta, S., Hong, M., & Mitra, T. (2020) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2020.3047337 · Cited by 49
Hindi fake news detection using transformer ensembles
Praseed, A., Rodrigues, J., & Thilagam, P. S. (2022) · Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2022.105731 · Cited by 46
van Berkel, N., Sarsenbayeva, Z., & Gonçalves, J. (2022) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2022.102954 · Cited by 48
Examining the Impact of Provenance-Enabled Media on Trust and Accuracy Perceptions
Feng, K. J. K., Ritchie, N., Blumenthal, P., Parsons, A., & Zhang, A. X. (2023) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3610061 · Cited by 52
Accost, Accede, or Amplify: Attitudes towards COVID-19 Misinformation on WhatsApp in India
Varanasi, R. A., Pal, J., & Vashistha, A. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517588 · Cited by 46
Social media and COVID-19 misinformation: how ignorant Facebook users are?
Al-Zaman, M. S. (2021) · Heliyon · doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07144 · Cited by 46
Passages: Interacting with Text Across Documents
Han, H. L., Yu, J., Bournet, R., Ciorascu, A., Mackay, W. E., & Beaudouin-Lafon, M. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3502052 · Cited by 38
Román-San-Miguel, A., Valenzuela, N. C. S.-G., & Zambrano, R. E. (2020) · Revista Latina de Comunicación Social · doi:10.4185/rlcs-2020-1481 · Cited by 46
The mass, fake news, and cognition security
Guo, B., Ding, Y., Sun, Y., Ma, S., Li, K., & Yu, Z. (2020) · Frontiers of Computer Science · doi:10.1007/s11704-020-9256-0 · Cited by 41
The Government's Dividend: Complex Perceptions of Social Media Misinformation in China
Lu, Z., Jiang, Y., Lu, C., Naaman, M., & Wigdor, D. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376612 · Cited by 36
Scheffauer, R., Goyanes, M., & de Zúñiga, H. G. (2023) · Journalism · doi:10.1177/14648849231179804 · Cited by 35
Protection from ‘Fake News’: The Need for Descriptive Factual Labeling for Online Content
Spradling, M., Straub, J., & Strong, J. (2021) · Future Internet · doi:10.3390/fi13060142 · Cited by 36
Diakopoulos, N. A., Trielli, D., & Lee, G. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3479550 · Cited by 42
Ahmed, S. (2023) · Asian Journal of Communication · doi:10.1080/01292986.2023.2194886 · Cited by 34
Falling for fake news: the role of political bias and cognitive ability
Tandoc, E. C., Lee, J., Chew, M., Tan, F. X., & Goh, Z. H. (2021) · Asian Journal of Communication · doi:10.1080/01292986.2021.1941149 · Cited by 38
We are the Change that we Seek
McKay, D., Makri, S., Lopez, M. G., MacFarlane, A., Missaoui, S., Porlezza, C., & Cooper, G. (2020) · Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3343413.3377975 · Cited by 37
Tkáčová, H., Pavlíková, M., Страновска, Э., & Králik, R. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20021605 · Cited by 32
Keepin' it Reel: Investigating how Short Videos on TikTok and Instagram Reels Influence View Change
Molem, A., Makri, S., & McKay, D. (2024) · Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3627508.3638341 · Cited by 31
Opaque algorithms, transparent biases: Automated content moderation during the Sheikh Jarrah Crisis
Abokhodair, N., Skop, Y., Rüller, S., Aal, K., & Elmimouni, H. (2024) · First Monday · doi:10.5210/fm.v29i4.13620 · Cited by 33
People’s understanding of the concept of misinformation
Osman, M., Adams, Z., Meder, B., Bechlivanidis, C., Verduga, O., & Strong, C. (2022) · Journal of Risk Research · doi:10.1080/13669877.2022.2049623 · Cited by 36
What Do We Mean When We Talk about Trust in Social Media? A Systematic Review
Zhang, Y., Gaggiano, J. D., Yongsatianchot, N., Suhaimi, N. M., Kim, M., Sun, Y., Griffin, J., & Parker, A. G. (2023) · Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581019 · Cited by 29
Counteracting the Impact of Online Fake News on Brands
Cham, T., Cheng, B. L., Aw, E. C., Tan, G. W., Loh, X.-M., & Ooi, K. (2023) · Journal of Computer Information Systems · doi:10.1080/08874417.2023.2191350 · Cited by 31
The Influence of Smartphone Use on Tweens’ Capacity for Complex Critical Thinking
Fabio, R. A., & Suriano, R. (2023) · Children · doi:10.3390/children10040698 · Cited by 28
Heuer, H., & Breiter, A. (2018) · Proceedings of the 10th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3240167.3240172 · Cited by 27
Alo, U. R., Nkwo, F. O., Nweke, H. F., Achi, I. I., & Okemiri, H. A. (2021) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s22010280 · Cited by 27
Who's in the Crowd Matters: Cognitive Factors and Beliefs Predict Misinformation Assessment Accuracy
Kaufman, R. A., Haupt, M. R., & Dow, S. P. (2022) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3555611 · Cited by 30
Buchanan, G. R., Kelly, R., Makri, S., & McKay, D. (2022) · Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval · doi:10.1145/3498366.3505823 · Cited by 26
A Comparative Evaluation of Interventions Against Misinformation: Augmenting the WHO Checklist
Heuer, H., & Glassman, E. L. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517717 · Cited by 26
Malki, L. M., Patel, D., & Singh, A. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3637405 · Cited by 25
“Brave New World” of Fake News: How It Works
Baptista, J. P., & Gradim, A. (2021) · Javnost - The Public · doi:10.1080/13183222.2021.1861409 · Cited by 29
Social media for improved process management in organizations during disasters
Ray, A., & Bala, P. K. (2020) · Knowledge and Process Management · doi:10.1002/kpm.1623 · Cited by 23
A study of fake news reading and annotating in social media context
Simko, J., Racsko, P., Tomlein, M., Hanakova, M., Móro, R., & Bielikova, M. (2021) · New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia · doi:10.1080/13614568.2021.1889691 · Cited by 23
Fake News Reading on Social Media
Šimko, J., Hanakova, M., Racsko, P., Tomlein, M., Móro, R., & Bieliková, M. (2019) · ACM Conference on Hypertext and Social Media (HT) · doi:10.1145/3342220.3343642 · Cited by 22
Munyaka, I. N. S., Hargittai, E., & Redmiles, E. M. (2022) · Journal of Online Trust and Safety · doi:10.54501/jots.v1i4.62 · Cited by 24
Understanding the Use of Fauxtography on Social Media
Wang, Y.-P., Tahmasbi, F., Blackburn, J., Bradlyn, B., Cristofaro, E. D., Magerman, D. M., Zannettou, S., & Stringhini, G. (2021) · Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media · doi:10.1609/icwsm.v15i1.18102 · Cited by 22
Shielding or Silencing?: An Investigation into Content Moderation during the Sheikh Jarrah Crisis
Elmimouni, H., Skop, Y., Abokhodair, N., Rüller, S., Aal, K., Weibert, A., Al-Dawood, A., Wulf, V., & Tolmie, P. (2024) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3633071 · Cited by 21
Detection of Fake News Using Transformer Model
Qazi, M., Khan, M. U. S., & Ali, M. (2020) · International Conference on Computing, Mathematics and Engineering Technologies (iCoMET) · doi:10.1109/icomet48670.2020.9074071 · Cited by 21
Ownership, Privacy, and Control in the Wake of Cambridge Analytica
Shipman, F. M., III, & Marshall, C. C. (2020) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3313831.3376662 · Cited by 21
Ameen, K., & Naeem, S. B. (2020) · Information Discovery and Delivery · doi:10.1108/idd-02-2020-0015 · Cited by 21
Designing Media Provenance Indicators to Combat Fake Media
Sherman, I. N., Stokes, J., & Redmiles, E. M. (2021) · International Symposium on Recent Advances in Intrusion Detection · doi:10.1145/3471621.3471860 · Cited by 23
Social Media COVID-19 Misinformation Interventions Viewed Positively, But Have Limited ImpactPreprint
Geeng, C., Francisco, T., West, J. D., & Roesner, F. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.11055 · Cited by 23
Evaluating the Spread of Fake News and its Detection. Techniques on Social Networking Sites
Hassan, I., Azmi, M. N. L., & Abdullahi, A. M. (2020) · Romanian Journal of Communication and Public Relations · doi:10.21018/rjcpr.2020.1.289 · Cited by 19
Liu, Z., Shan, J., Delaloye, M., Piguet, J.-G., & Balet, N. G. (2020) · Journalism and Media · doi:10.3390/journalmedia1010010 · Cited by 19
Karduni, A. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.07136 · Cited by 19
Peer-supplied credibility labels as an online misinformation intervention
Pareek, S., & Gonçalves, J. (2024) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2024.103276 · Cited by 20
MANIFESTO: a huMAN-centric explaInable approach for FakE news spreaders deTectiOn
Lampridis, O., Karanatsiou, D., & Vakali, A. I. (2022) · Computing · doi:10.1007/s00607-021-01013-w · Cited by 17
Reliability Criteria for News Websites
Heuer, H., & Glassman, E. L. (2023) · ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction · doi:10.1145/3635147 · Cited by 20
Wang, L., & Fussell, S. R. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3375189 · Cited by 17
Rumor proliferation and detection in Social Media: A Review
Reshi, J. A., & Ali, R. (2019) · International Conference on Advanced Computing and Communication Systems (ICACCS) · doi:10.1109/icaccs.2019.8728321 · Cited by 17
Trust in information sources during the COVID-19 pandemic. A Romanian case study
Buturoiu, R., Corbu, N., Oprea, D.-A., & Boţan, M. (2021) · Communications · doi:10.1515/commun-2020-0052 · Cited by 19
Lu, Z., Jiang, Y., Shen, C., Jack, M., Wigdor, D., & Naaman, M. (2021) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3449251 · Cited by 20
Mayer, A.-T., Ohme, J., Masłowska, E., & Segijn, C. M. (2024) · Social Media + Society · doi:10.1177/20563051241245666 · Cited by 15
A Gamified Platform to Support Educational Activities About Fake News in Social Media
Capecchi, S., Lieto, A., Patti, F., Pensa, R. G., Rapp, A., Vernero, F., & Zingaro, S. (2024) · IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies · doi:10.1109/tlt.2024.3410088 · Cited by 15
Tang, H., Lenzini, G., Greiff, S., Rohles, B., & Sergeeva, A. (2024) · Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3643834.3661510 · Cited by 15
Social media as inadvertent educators
Kotsonis, A. (2020) · Journal of Moral Education · doi:10.1080/03057240.2020.1838267 · Cited by 15
Data-inspired co-design for museum and gallery visitor experiences
Darzentas, D., Cameron, H., Wagner, H. G., Craigon, P. J., Bodiaj, E., Spence, J. C., Tennent, P., & Benford, S. (2022) · Artificial intelligence for engineering design analysis and manufacturing · doi:10.1017/s0890060421000317 · Cited by 15
Sharevski, F., Loop, J. V., & Das, S. (2025) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3710913 · Cited by 16
Towards Conviviality in NavigatingHealth Information on Social Media
Karusala, N., & Anderson, R. (2022) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3491102.3517622 · Cited by 16
Lee, K. S., & Wei, H.-X. (2022) · Journal of Media Ethics · doi:10.1080/23736992.2022.2107524 · Cited by 7
Brockinton, A., Hirst, S., Wang, R., McAlaney, J., & Thompson, S. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.999780 · Cited by 13
Molina, R. A. G. (2021) · adComunica revista científica de estrategias tendencias e innovación en comunicación · doi:10.6035/2174-0992.2021.21.13 · Cited by 13
The Power of Related Articles – Improving Fake News Detection on Social Media Platforms
Gimpel, H., Heger, S., Kasper, J., & Schäfer, R. (2020) · Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) · doi:10.24251/hicss.2020.743 · Cited by 13
SPAM-DaS: Secure and Privacy-Aware Misinformation Detection as a ServicePreprint
Ali, H. M., Javed, R. T., Qayyum, A., AlGhadhban, A., Alazmi, M., Alzamil, A., Al-Utaibi, K. A., & Qadir, J. (2022) · doi:10.36227/techrxiv.19351679.v1 · Cited by 14
Trustworthiness Perceptions of Social Media Resources Named after a Crisis Event
Chauhan, A., & Hughes, A. L. (2020) · Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3392849 · Cited by 12
Melchior, C., Warin, T., & Oliveira, M. F. D. A. (2025) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2024.123969 · Cited by 13
Backfiring and favouring: how design processes in HCI lead to anti-patterns and repentant designers
Widdicks, K., Pargman, D. S., & Björk, S. L. (2020) · Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction · doi:10.1145/3419249.3420175 · Cited by 12
Fedorov, A., & Levitskaya, A. (2021) · Mediaobrazovanie · doi:10.13187/me.2021.1.64 · Cited by 12
Examining Source Effects on Perceptions of Fake News in Rural India
Shahid, F., Mare, S., & Vashistha, A. (2022) · Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. · doi:10.1145/3512936 · Cited by 15
García-Borrego, M., & Casero-Ripollés, A. (2022) · Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico · doi:10.5209/esmp.82881 · Cited by 12
Understanding Journalists’ Workflows in News Curation
Atreja, S., Srinath, S., Jain, M., & Pal, J. (2023) · CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3544548.3581542 · Cited by 11
Medios de comunicación públicos y participación ciudadana
varios, A. (2021) · adComunica revista científica de estrategias tendencias e innovación en comunicación · doi:10.6035/2174-0992.2021.21 · Cited by 11
A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Women’s Health Misinformation on Social Media
Malki, L. M., Patel, D., & Singh, A. (2023) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-42286-7_22 · Cited by 10
Moreira, T. O., Passos, C. A., da Silva, F. R. M., Freire, P. M. S., de Souza, I. F., da Silva, C. S., & Goldschmidt, R. R. (2023) · Education and Information Technologies · doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12309-z · Cited by 10
Dar, R. A., Hashmy, R., Anwar, M. S., Böhm, P., & Frnda, J. (2025) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0321919 · Cited by 10
Almeida, F., & Mortari, V. S. (2021) · Journal of Economic Issues · doi:10.1080/00213624.2021.1908087 · Cited by 10
Understanding College Students’ News Sharing Experience on Instagram
Wang, L. (2021) · ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) · doi:10.1145/3462204.3481779 · Cited by 10
Reinforcement Learning-based Knowledge Graph Reasoning for Explainable Fact-checking
Nikopensius, G., Mayank, M., Phukan, O. C., & Sharma, R. R. (2023) · IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM) · doi:10.1145/3625007.3627593 · Cited by 10
A Multi-Platform Analysis of Political News Discussion and Sharing on Web Communities
Wang, Y.-P., Zannettou, S., Blackburn, J., Bradlyn, B., Cristofaro, E. D., & Stringhini, G. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Big Data (BigData) · doi:10.1109/bigdata52589.2021.9671843 · Cited by 11
Wani, A., Joshi, I., & Singh, P. (2024) · Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact. · doi:10.1145/3637375 · Cited by 8
Metadata
- Authors
- Flintham, M., Karner, C., Bachour, K., Creswick, H., Gupta, N., & Moran, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Nottingham (GB)
- University of Lincoln (GB)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2018-04-21
- Pages
- 1-10
- OpenAlex
- W2789935117
- Cited by
- 194
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 29 · 2020: 29 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 2
- FWCI
- 57.16
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Licence
- Locations
- CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (publishedVersion)
- Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
- Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
- Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- University of Nottingham
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Social Sciences › Communication › Journalism and Media Studies
- Keywords
- fake news, post-truth, social media news consumption, Facebook, verification strategies, misinformation, institutional trust, skepticism, source evaluation, journalistic style, belief formation, satire, hoaxes
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
