scholarly journals Advised or Paid Way to get it right. The contribution of fact-checking tips and monetary incentives to spotting scientific disinformation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Folco Panizza ◽  
Piero Ronzani ◽  
Simone Mattavelli ◽  
Tiffany Morisseau ◽  
Carlo Martini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monetary Incentive ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Monetary Incentives ◽  
Media Environment ◽  
Literacy Interventions ◽  
First Results ◽  
Accuracy Study ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Objectively Measured ◽  
Health Burdens

Abstract Disinformation about science can impose enormous economic and public health burdens. Several types of interventions have been proposed to prevent the proliferation of false information online, where most of the spreading takes place. A recently proposed strategy to help online users recognise false content is to follow the techniques of professional fact checkers, such as looking for information on other websites (lateral reading) and looking beyond the first results suggested by search engines (click restraint). In two preregistered online experiments (N = 5387), we simulated a social-media environment and set-out two interventions, one in the form of a pop-up meant to advise participants to follow such techniques, the other based on monetary incentive. In Experiment 1, we compared these interventions to a control condition. In Experiment 2 another condition was added to test the joint impact of the pop-up and the monetary incentive. We measured participants' ability to identify whether presented information was scientifically valid or invalid. Results revealed that while monetary incentives were overall more effective in increasing accuracy, the pop-up contributed when the post originated from an unknown source (and participants could rely less on prior information). Additional analysis on participants’ search style based on both self-report responses and objectively measured behaviour revealed that the pop-up increased the use of fact-checking strategies, and that these in turn increased accuracy. Study 2 also clarified that the pop-up and the incentive did not interfere with each other, but rather acted complementarily, suggesting that attention and literacy interventions can be designed in synergy.

scholarly journals Lateral reading and monetary incentives to sort out scientific (dis)information

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Folco Panizza ◽  
Piero Ronzani ◽  
Simone Mattavelli ◽  
Tiffany Morisseau ◽  
Carlo Martini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Information ◽  
Monetary Incentive ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Monetary Incentives ◽  
Literacy Interventions ◽  
First Results ◽  
Accuracy Study ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Objectively Measured ◽  
Health Burdens

Scientific disinformation can impose enormous economic and public health burdens. Several types of interventions have been proposed to prevent the proliferation of false information online, where most of the spreading takes place. A recently proposed strategy to help online users recognise false content is to follow the techniques of professional fact checkers, such as looking for information on other websites (lateral reading) and looking beyond the first results suggested by search engines (click restraint). In two preregistered online experiments (N = 5387), we simulated a social-media environment and set-out two interventions, one in the form of a pop-up meant to induce participants to follow such techniques, the other based on monetary incentive. In Experiment 1, we compared these interventions to a control condition. In Experiment 2 another condition was added to test the joint impact of the pop-up and the monetary incentive. We measured participants' ability to identify whether presented scientific information was scientifically (in)valid. Results revealed that while monetary incentives were overall more effective in increasing accuracy, the pop-up contributed when the post originated from an unknown source (and participants could rely less on prior information). Additional analysis on participants’ search style based on both self-report responses and objectively measured behaviour revealed that the pop-up increased the use of fact-checking strategies, and that these in turn increased accuracy. Study 2 also clarified that the pop-up and the incentive did not interfere with each other, but rather acted complementarily, suggesting that attention and literacy interventions can be designed in synergy.

scholarly journals Don't pay attention! Paradoxical effects of monetary incentive on attentional performance in older adults

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cindy Lustig ◽  
Ziyong Lin ◽  
Anne S. Berry
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Young Adults ◽  
Monetary Incentive ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Age Difference ◽  
Monetary Incentives ◽  
Specific Effects ◽  
Timing Task ◽  
Distraction Control ◽  
Adult Aging

Adult aging is associated with reductions in attentional control, but performance may be influenced by factors including types of attention assessed (e.g. sustaining, resistance distraction) and participants’ motivation. In Experiment 1, we used the Continuous Temporal Expectancy Task with Video Distractor (Berry, Li, Lin, and Lustig), a timing task to assess young and older adults’ ability to sustain attention, and manipulated whether a nearby laptop was silent or playing videos to access distractor vulnerability. Older adults outperformed young adults overall. Self-report measures suggested that lack of engagement by young adults drove this paradoxical age difference. Experiment 2 directly tested the effect of motivation via monetary incentives. The monetary incentive tended to improve the performance of young adults, but significantly reduced the performance of older adults. Incentive had its primary effects on focused attention and overall performance rather than specific effects on either sustained attention or distraction control.

Preferences Toward COVID-19 Diagnostic Testing Features: Results From a National Cross-Sectional Survey

2021 ◽  
pp. 089011712110340
Author(s):  
Bhagyashree Katare ◽  
Shuoli Zhao ◽  
Joel Cuffey ◽  
Maria I. Marshall ◽  
Corinne Valdivia
Keyword(s):  
Logit Model ◽  
Nasal Swab ◽  
Latent Class ◽  
Diagnostic Testing ◽  
Mixed Logit ◽  
Monetary Incentive ◽  
Monetary Incentives ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Nationally Representative

Purpose: Describe preferences toward COVID-19 testing features (method, location, hypothetical monetary incentive) and simulate the effect of monetary incentives on willingness to test. Design: Online cross-sectional survey administered in July 2020. Subjects: 1,505 nationally representative U.S. respondents. Measures: Choice of preferred COVID-19 testing options in discrete choice experiment. Options differed by method (nasal-swab, saliva), location (hospital/clinic, drive-through, at-home), and monetary incentive ($0, $10, $20). Analysis: Latent class conditional logit model to classify preferences, mixed logit model to simulate incentive effectiveness. Results: Preferences were categorized into 4 groups: 34% (n = 517) considered testing comfort (saliva versus nasal swab) most important, 27% (n = 408) were willing to trade comfort for monetary incentives, 19% (n = 287) would only test at convenient locations, 20% (n = 293) avoided testing altogether. Relative to no monetary incentives, incentives of $100 increased the percent of testing avoiders (16%) and convenience seekers (70%) that were willing to test. Conclusion: Preferences toward different COVID-19 testing features vary, highlighting the need to match testing features with individuals to monitor the spread of COVID-19.

A Taxonomy Approach to Fake News

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Valchanov ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Communication Channels ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Online Environment ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Media Environment ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Media ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Points Of View ◽  
Media Corporations

The development of the Internet and social media and networks as a media environment and communication channels combined with the specificity of the journalistic profession in the online environment are a factor which contributes to the emergence and proliferation of fake news. The lack of reliable fact checking by the media and the fast news consumption by the public lead to mass disinformation about certain issues or subjects. The current paper examines fake news from several points of view and describes the models of their use – as harmless jokes, as lack of journalistic competence or professionalism and as means of manipulation and intentional misleading of public opinion. The attempts of big media corporations to fight fake news are also described.

How to motivate opinion leaders to spread e-WoM on social media: monetary vs non-monetary incentives

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuela López ◽  
Maria Sicilia ◽  
Peeter W.J. Verlegh
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Experimental Design ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Word Of Mouth ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
Monetary Incentive ◽  
Opinion Leaders ◽  
Monetary Incentives ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Source Of Information

PurposeOpinion leaders are increasingly important as a source of information, with consumers judging them to be more credible than other media and more influential than other consumers. Thus, companies have an interest in engaging opinion leaders to post about products and brands, and the authors analyse different incentives for encouraging them to spread the word on social media (via electronic word-of-mouth [e-WoM]).Design/methodology/approachA 2 × 3 between-subjects experimental design was developed in which 359 technological opinion leaders (bloggers) participated. The authors manipulated the monetary incentive (money vs no money) and non-monetary incentives (information only vs return product vs keep product) offered in exchange for a brand post.FindingsVarious techniques for approaching opinion leaders are effective, but to differing degrees. Providing a product free of charge increases the likelihood that opinion leaders will post about it, and the highest intention to post is observed when they are allowed to keep the product. In contrast, giving money to opinion leaders could have an indirect negative impact on their intention to post through the expected negative reaction of followers.Originality/valueIt remains unclear how opinion leaders can best be encouraged to spread e-WoM, as incentives used for consumers may work differently for opinion leaders, who have followers that they want to maintain. The main contribution of this paper lies in its explanation of why opinion leaders react differently to monetary versus non-monetary incentives.

scholarly journals Discipline and promote: Building infrastructure and managing algorithms in a “structured journalism” project by professional fact-checking groups

2020 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 342-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucas Graves ◽  
CW Anderson
Keyword(s):  
Social Networks ◽  
Digital Media ◽  
Search Engines ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Media Environment ◽  
Data Standard ◽  
The Social ◽  
News Organizations ◽  
Fact Checking ◽  
Technical Challenges

News organizations have adapted in various ways to a digital media environment dominated by algorithmic gatekeepers such as search engines and social networks. This article dissects a campaign to actively shape that environment led by professional fact-checking organizations. We trace the development of the Share the Facts “widget,” a device designed to give fact-checks greater purchase in algorithmically governed media networks by driving adoption of a new data standard called ClaimReview. We show how “structured journalism” gave journalists a language for the social and technical challenges involved, and how this infrastructural technology mediates between fact-checkers, audiences, and platform companies. We argue that this standard-setting initiative exhibits both promotional and disciplining facets, offering greater distribution and impact to journalists while also defining their work in specific ways. Crucially, in this case, this disciplining influence reflects internal professional-institutional agendas in an emerging subfield of journalism as much as the demands of platform companies.

scholarly journals Instructional and learning outcomes in China and the USA as policy implications

2017 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haiyong Ding ◽  
Ang Chen
Keyword(s):  
Middle Schools ◽  
Learning Outcomes ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Instructional Approaches ◽  
High Stake ◽  
Learner Motivation ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Self Report Data ◽  
Objectively Measured

There are substantial differences between the Chinese and US education systems. One difference is in the design and use of assessment due to differences in educational policies. This study described the differences in student learning outcomes, instructional approaches, and learner motivation in physical education as consequences of the policies in the two countries. Objectively measured data on skill and knowledge achievement and instructional procedures, and self-report data on student motivation were collected from a random sample of 870 students in 24 whole classes from eight Chinese middle schools and 1213 students in 39 classes from 15 US middle schools. Multivariate analyses of variance on class means revealed that Chinese students outperformed their US peers in skills, perhaps because skills were part of the high-stake tests for advancement in schooling. They were outperformed by the US students in a fitness knowledge test, perhaps because knowledge was not part of the high-stake tests. The differences in learning outcomes, instructional approaches, and motivation seem to suggest strong differentiated influences from the two countries’ respective educational environments and assessment policies.

scholarly journals Validity and reliability of an online self-report 24-h dietary recall method (Intake24): a doubly labelled water study and repeated-measures analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma Foster ◽  
Clement Lee ◽  
Fumiaki Imamura ◽  
Stefanie E. Hollidge ◽  
Kate L. Westgate ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Low Cost ◽  
Dietary Assessment ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Validity And Reliability ◽  
Doubly Labelled Water ◽  
Dietary Recall ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Objectively Measured

Abstract Online self-reported 24-h dietary recall systems promise increased feasibility of dietary assessment. Comparison against interviewer-led recalls established their convergent validity; however, reliability and criterion-validity information is lacking. The validity of energy intakes (EI) reported using Intake24, an online 24-h recall system, was assessed against concurrent measurement of total energy expenditure (TEE) using doubly labelled water in ninety-eight UK adults (40–65 years). Accuracy and precision of EI were assessed using correlation and Bland–Altman analysis. Test–retest reliability of energy and nutrient intakes was assessed using data from three further UK studies where participants (11–88 years) completed Intake24 at least four times; reliability was assessed using intra-class correlations (ICC). Compared with TEE, participants under-reported EI by 25 % (95 % limits of agreement −73 % to +68 %) in the first recall, 22 % (−61 % to +41 %) for average of first two, and 25 % (−60 % to +28 %) for first three recalls. Correlations between EI and TEE were 0·31 (first), 0·47 (first two) and 0·39 (first three recalls), respectively. ICC for a single recall was 0·35 for EI and ranged from 0·31 for Fe to 0·43 for non-milk extrinsic sugars (NMES). Considering pairs of recalls (first two v. third and fourth recalls), ICC was 0·52 for EI and ranged from 0·37 for fat to 0·63 for NMES. EI reported with Intake24 was moderately correlated with objectively measured TEE and underestimated on average to the same extent as seen with interviewer-led 24-h recalls and estimated weight food diaries. Online 24-h recall systems may offer low-cost, low-burden alternatives for collecting dietary information.

scholarly journals The Association Between Self-Reported and Objectively Measured Energy Level in Older Adults

2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 179-179
Author(s):  
Qu Tian ◽  
Nancy Glynn ◽  
Rebecca Ehrenkranz ◽  
Briana Sprague ◽  
Andrea Rosso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Energy Expenditure ◽  
Energy Level ◽  
Total Energy ◽  
Total Energy Expenditure ◽  
Activity Level ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Energy Availability ◽  
Measured Energy ◽  
Objectively Measured

Abstract Energy is an important concept in human health and diseases. Self-reported energy has been described as “the individual’s potential to perform physical and mental activity” and “the individual’s energy availability”. However, little empirical data exists on whether self-reported energy level is related to objectively measured energy level. Prior research suggests that more energy availability is associated with higher physical activity level. It remains unclear whether self-reported energy availability would be associated with objectively measured energy level, such as active energy expenditure and total energy expenditure. Using data from the Health, Aging and Body Composition Study, we identified 94 participants (mean age=86.2±2.4 y/o, 46%blacks, 52%women) with concurrent data on self-reported energy (scale 0-10) and objective energy level by the SenseWear Armband. We examined cross-sectional associations of self-reported energy with objectively measured energy and physical activity levels using Spearman correlation. Greater self-reported energy level was associated with higher daily active energy expenditure in kcal (r=0.30,p=0.004), higher METs (r=0.33,p<0.001), more minutes of physical activity (r=0.35,p<0.001), and more step counts (r=0.36,p<0.001). Self-reported energy was not associated with total energy expenditure (p=0.87) or estimated resting metabolic rate (p=0.53). Self-reported energy may reflect an individual’s activity energy expenditure but not total energy expenditure. It further supports the hypothesis that energy availability even by self-report connects to physical activity behavior. Whether self-reported energy correlates with other health outcomes warrants further investigation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document