The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pseudo-Information, Media, Publics, and the Failing Marketplace of Ideas: Theory
Abstract
The explosive usage in recent years of the terms “fake news” and “posttruth” reflects worldwide frustration and concern about rampant social problems created by pseudo-information. Our digital networked society and newly emerging media platforms foster public misunderstanding of social affairs, which affects almost all aspects of individual life. The cost of lay citizens’ misunderstandings or crippled lay informatics can be high. Pseudo-information is responsible for deficient social systems and institutional malfunction. We thus ask questions and collect knowledge about the life of pseudo-information and the cognitive and communicative modus operandi of lay publics, as well as how to solve the problem of pseudo-information through understanding the changing media environment in this “truth-be-damned” era of information crisis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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
“Indeed, disinformation and misinformation can significantly influence and distort the public debate, leading to misinformed opinions, polarized discussions, and eroded trust in the public sphere (Kim & Gil de Zúñiga, 2020;Lovari, 2020).”
From Exploring the Challenges of Generative AI on Public Sector Communication in Europe (2025) · cites this paper as Kim & Gil de Zúñiga, 2020
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
“Fake News” Is Not Simply False Information: A Concept Explication and Taxonomy of Online Content
Molina, M. D., Sundar, S. S., Le, T., & Lee, D. (2021) · American Behavioral Scientist · doi:10.1177/0002764219878224 · Cited by 485
Research works printed but not linked: 25
- Bimber B., Gil de Zúñiga H. (2020). The unedited public sphere. New Media & Society, 22(4), 700-715. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819893980 · DOI
- Carter R. F., 1972, Far West Region Meeting, Society for General Systems Research
- Chaffee S., 1991, Explication
- Chiu M. M., Oh Y. W. (2021). How fake news differ from personal lies. American Behavioral Scientist, 65: 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220910243 · DOI
- Donovan J., Boyd D. (2021). Stop the presses? Moving from strategic silence to strategic amplification in a networked media ecosystem. American Behavioral Scientist, 65, 333-50. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219878229 · DOI
- Gagliardone I. (2018). World trends in freedom of expression and media development 2018: Global Report 2017/2018. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322977599_World_Trends_in_Freedom_of_Expression_and_Media_Development_2018/link/5a7abbc145851541ce5efc85/download
- Gil de Zúñiga H. (2015). Toward a European public sphere? The promise and perils of modern democracy in the age of digital and social media. International Journal of Communication, 9, 3152-3160. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/4783
- Grunig J. E., 2003, Communication, a different kind of horse race: Essays honoring Richard F. Carter, 85
- Grunig J. E., Kim J-N. (2017). Publics approaches to health and risk message design and processing. Oxford encyclopedia of health and risk message design and processing. https://doi.10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.322 · DOI
- Ha L. H., Perez L. A., Ray R. (2021). Mapping recent development in scholarship on fake news and misinformation 2008-2017: Disciplinary contribution, topics and impact. American Behavioral Scientist, 65, 290-315. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869402 · DOI
- Jang S. M., Mortensen T., Liu J. (2021). Does media literacy help identification of fake news? Information literacy helps, but other literacies don’t. American Behavioral Scientist, 65, 371-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869406 · DOI · Paper page
- Kim J.-N., 2014, Communication Insight, 3, 10
- Kim J.N. (2018). Digital networked information society and public health: Problems and promises of networked health communication of lay publics. Health Communication, 33(1), 1-4, https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1242039 · doi:10.1080/10410236.2016.1242039
- 10.1080/15531181003701913 · DOI
- Kim J.N., Grunig J. E. (2011). Problem solving and communicative action: A situational theory of problem solving. Journal of Communication, 61(1), 120-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01529.x · DOI · Paper page
- Kim J.N., Grunig J. E. (2021). Lost in informational paradise: Cognitive arrest to epistemic inertia in problem solving. American Behavioral Scientist, 65, 213-242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219878237 · DOI
- Kim J.N., Krishna A. (2014). Publics and lay informatics: A review of the situational theory of problem solving. Annals of the International Communication Association, 38(1), 71-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2014.11679159 · DOI
- Kim J.N., Oh Y. W., Krishna A. (2018). Justificatory information forefending in digital age: Self-sealing informational conviction of risky health behavior, Health Communication, 33(1), 85-93, https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1242040 · DOI
- Krishna A., Thompson T. (2021). Misinformation about health: A review of health communication and misinformation scholarship. American Behavioral Scientist, 65, 316-332. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219878223 · DOI
- Lee E. J., Shin S. Y. (2019). Mediated misinformation: Questions answered, more questions to ask. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869403 · DOI · Paper page
- Lovari A., Martino V., Righetti N. (2020). Blurred shots: Investigating information crisis around vaccination in Italy. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220910245 · DOI
- Marx K. (1867). Das Kapital: Kritik der politischen Oekonomie: Der Produktionsprozess des Kapitals (Vol. 1, 1st ed.) [Capital: A Critique of Political Economy. Volume I: The Process of Capitalist Production]. Verlag von Otto Meissner. https://doi.org/10.3931/e-rara-25773 · doi:10.3931/e-rara-25773
- Oh Y. W., Park C. H. (2019). Machine-cleaning of online opinion spam: Developing a machine-learning algorithm for detecting deceptive comments. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219878238 · DOI
- Stanley J. (2018, September 4). What John Stuart Mill got wrong about freedom of speech. Boston Review. http://bostonreview.net/politics-philosophy-religion/jason-stanley-what-mill-got-wrong-about-freedom-of-speech
- Weeks B., Gil de Zúñiga H. (2019). What’s next? Six observations for the future of political misinformation research. American Behavioral Scientist. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219878236 · DOI
Cited by
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Goyanes, M., & Durotoye, T. (2024) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2023.2290497 · Cited by 198
Exploring the Challenges of Generative AI on Public Sector Communication in Europe
Lovari, A., & De Rosa, F. (2025) · Media and Communication · doi:10.17645/mac.9644 · Cited by 22
Metadata
- Authors
- Kim, J.-N., & Gil de Zúñiga, H.
- Affiliations
- The University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, USA
- University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain
- Venue
- American Behavioral Scientist
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2020-08-30
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 163-179
- ISSN
- 0002-7642
- 1552-3381
- Cited by
- 53
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pseudo-Information, Media, Publics, and the Failing Marketplace of Ideas: Theory. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0002764220950606
- The paper
- Kim, J.-N., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2021). Pseudo-Information, Media, Publics, and the Failing Marketplace of Ideas: Theory. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764220950606
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
