CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14Public Relations and Crisis CommunicationMisinformation and Its ImpactsDisaster Management and Resilience

Trustworthiness Perceptions of Social Media Resources Named after a Crisis Event

Chauhan, Apoorva, Hughes, Amanda Lee·2020·Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1145/3392849
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

People often create social media accounts and pages named after crisis events. We call such accounts and pages Crisis Named Resources (CNRs). CNRs share information about crisis events and are followed by many. Yet, they also appear suddenly (at crisis onset) and in most cases, the owners are unknown. Thus, it can be challenging for audiences in particular to know whether to trust (or not trust) these CNRs and the information they provide. In this study, we conducted surveys and interviews with members of the public and experts in crisis informatics, emergency response, and communication studies to evaluate the trustworthiness of CNRs named after the 2017 Hurricane Irma. Findings showed that participants evaluated trustworthiness based on their perceptions of a CNR's content, information source, profile, and owner. Findings also show that if people perceive that a CNR owner has prior experience in crisis response, can help the public to respond to the event, understands the situation, has the best interests of affected individuals in mind, or will correct misinformation, they tend to trust that CNR. Participant demographics and expertise showed no effect on perceptions of trustworthiness.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3392849

Cites

47 of 47 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?

  • Contextual factors, including relevancy, timeliness, and perceived usefulness of information, positively influence trust in information from social media.

    “Contextual factors, including the relevancy of information [13], the timeliness of information [13,14,46], and the perceived usefulness of information, positively infuence trust in information from social media.”

    From What Do We Mean When We Talk about Trust in Social Media? A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [13]

  • Presenting information alongside the URL of the original source significantly increases people's trust in that information.

    “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 [13]

  • Multi-media and visual components invoke positive emotional sentiments among users, which contributes to increased trust in that information.

    “This is because these components often invoke positive emotional sentiments among users, which contributes to increased trust in that information [13,40,56].”

    From What Do We Mean When We Talk about Trust in Social Media? A Systematic Review (2023) · cites this paper as [13]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 49 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chauhan, A., & Hughes, A. L.
Affiliations
  • University of Waterloo (CA)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
ORCID
Hughes, Amanda Lee
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery (ACM)
Published
2020-05-28
Volume
4
Issue
CSCW1
Pages
1-23
ISSN
2573-0142 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1145/3392849
OpenAlex
W3048396016
Cited by
12
References
49
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4
FWCI
1.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.acm.org/publications/policies/copyright_policy#Background (vor)
Locations
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Public Relations and Crisis Communication
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
trustworthiness, social media, Hurricane Irma, crisis information, misinformation, emergency response, source evaluation, user profiles, public perception, crisis informatics

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