Abstract
Effective digital literacy interventions can positively influence social media users’ ability to identify fake news content. This research aimed to (a) introduce a new experiential training digital literacy intervention strategy, (b) evaluate the effect of different digital literacy interventions (i.e., priming critical thinking and an experiential training exercise) on the perceived accuracy of fake news and individuals’ subsequent online behavioral intentions, and (c) explore the underlying mechanisms that link various digital literacy interventions with the perceived accuracy of fake news and online behavioral intentions. The authors conducted a study, leveraging online experimental data from 609 participants. Participants were randomly assigned to different digital literacy interventions. Next, participants were shown a Tweeter tweet containing fake news story about the housing crisis and asked to evaluate the tweet in terms of its accuracy and self-report their intentions to engage in online activities related to it. They also reported their perceptions of skepticism and content diagnosticity. Both interventions were more effective than a control condition in improving participants’ ability to identify fake news messages. The findings suggest that the digital literacy interventions are associated with intentions to engage in online activities through a serial mediation model with three mediators, namely, skepticism, perceived accuracy and content diagnosticity. The results point to a need for broader application of experiential interventions on social media platforms to promote news consumers’ ability to identify fake news content.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All data and research materials are available at [https://osf.io/ukbe4; identifier: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UKBE4].
References
Ahadzadeh, A. S., Ong, F. S., & Wu, S. L. (2023). Social media skepticism and belief in conspiracy theories about COVID-19: The moderating role of the dark triad. Current Psychology, 42, 8874–8886. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02198-1
Altay, S., De Araujo, E., & Mercier, H. (2022). “If this account is true, it is most enormously wonderful”: Interestingness-if-true and the sharing of true and false news. Digital Journalism, 10(3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1941163
Amazeen, M. A., Thorson, E., Muddiman, A., & Graves, L. (2018). Correcting political and consumer misperceptions: The effectiveness and effects of rating scale versus contextual correction formats. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(1), 28–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699016678186
Amsalem, E., & Zoizner, A. (2023). Do people learn about politics on social media? A meta-analysis of 76 studies. Journal of Communication, 73(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqac034
Bago, B., Rand, D. G., & Pennycook, G. (2020). Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 149(8), 1608–1613. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000729
Barometer, E. T. (2021). [Online]. 2021, Available: https://www.edelman.com/trust/2021-trust-barometer. Accessed 30 Jul 021
Basol, M., Roozenbeek, J., & Van der Linden, S. (2020). Good news about bad news: Gamified inoculation boosts confidence and cognitive immunity against fake news. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.91
Bentler, P. M., & Mooijaart, A. (1989). Choice of structural model via parsimony: A rationale based on precision. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 315–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.315
Berinsky, A. J., Margolis, M. F., & Sances, M. W. (2014). Separating the shirkers from the workers? Making sure respondents pay attention on self-administered surveys. American Journal of Political Science, 58(3), 739–753. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12081
Bigne, E., Ruiz, C., Cuenca, A., Perez, C., & Garcia, A. (2021). What drives the helpfulness of online reviews? A deep learning study of sentiment analysis, pictorial content and reviewer expertise for mature destinations. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2021.100570
Brodsky, J. E., Brooks, P. J., Scimeca, D., Todorova, R., Galati, P., Batson, M., Grosso, R., Matthews, M., Miller, V., & Caulfield, M. (2021). Improving college students’ fact-checking strategies through lateral reading instruction in a general education civics course. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-021-00291-4
Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. (2017). Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PLoS One, 12(5), e0175799. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175799
Duffy, A., & Ling, R. (2020). The gift of news: Phatic news sharing on social media for social cohesion. Journalism Studies, 21(1), 72–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2019.1627900
Duncan, M. (2022). What’s in a label? Negative credibility labels in partisan news. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 99(2), 390–413. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699020961856
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Eshet-Alkalai, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93–106.
Fazio, L. (2020). Pausing to consider why a headline is true or false can help reduce the sharing of false news. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review, 1(2), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-009
Feuerstein, M. (1999). Media literacy in support of critical thinking. Journal of Educational Media, 24(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1358165990240104
Filieri, R., McLeay, F., Tsui, B., & Lin, Z. (2018). Consumer perceptions of information helpfulness and determinants of purchase intention in online consumer reviews of services. Information & Management, 55(8), 956–970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2018.04.010
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Gaskin, J., James, M., & Lim, J. (2020). Specific indirect effects. AMOS Estimand. Gaskination’s StatWiki.
Guess, A. M., Lerner, M., Lyons, B., Montgomery, J. M., Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., & Sircar, N. (2020). A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(27), 15536–15545. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920498117
Hair, J., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027
Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43(1), 115–135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118
Ireton, C., & Posetti, J. (2018). Journalism, fake news & misinformation: Handbook for journalism education and training. Unesco Publishing.
Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2004). Virtual product experience: Effects of visual and functional control of products on perceived diagnosticity and flow in electronic shopping. Journal of Management Information Systems, 21(3), 111–147. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2004.11045817
Jiang, Z., & Benbasat, I. (2007). The effects of presentation formats and task complexity on online consumers’ product understanding. Mis Quarterly, 475–500. https://doi.org/10.2307/25148804
Jungherr, A., & Schroeder, R. (2021). Disinformation and the structural transformations of the public arena: Addressing the actual challenges to democracy. Social Media + Society, 7(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305121988928
Kim, B., Xiong, A., Lee, D., & Han, K. (2021). A systematic review on fake news research through the lens of news creation and consumption: Research efforts, challenges, and future directions. PLoS One, 16(12), e0260080. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0260080
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
Kolb, D. A. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press.
Kozyreva, A., Lorenz-Spreen, P., Herzog, S., Ecker, U., Lewandowsky, S., & Hertwig, R. (2022). Toolbox of interventions against online misinformation and manipulation. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/x8ejt
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012). Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13(3), 106–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612451018
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Ecker, U. K. H., Albarracín, D., Amazeen, M. A., Kendeou, P., Lombardi, D., Newman, E. J., Pennycook, G., Porter, E. Rand, D. G., Rapp, D. N., Reifler, J., Roozenbeek, J., Schmid, P., Seifert, C. M., Sinatra, G. M., Swire-Thompson, B., van der Linden, S. …, Zaragoza, M. S. (2020). The debunking handbook 2020. https://sks.to/db2020. https://doi.org/10.17910/b7.1182
Li, M., Huang, L., Tan, C. H., & Wei, K. K. (2013). Helpfulness of online product reviews as seen by consumers: Source and content features. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 17(4), 101–136. https://doi.org/10.2753/JEC1086-4415170404
Liedke, J. & Matsa, K. E. (2022). Social media and news fact sheet. Pew Research Center. [cited 2023 Oct 10]. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/fact-sheet/social-media-and-news-fact-sheet/#who-consumes-news-on-each-social-media-site
Lutzke, L., Drummond, C., Slovic, P., & Árvai, J. (2019). Priming critical thinking: Simple interventions limit the influence of fake news about climate change on Facebook. Global Environmental Change, 58, 101964. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2019.101964
Martel, C., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2020). Reliance on emotion promotes belief in fake news. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-020-00252-3
Modirrousta-Galian, A., & Higham, P. A. (2023). Gamified inoculation interventions do not improve discrimination between true and fake news: Reanalyzing existing research with receiver operating characteristic analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 152(9), 2411–2437. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001395
Mudambi, S., & Schuff, D. (2010). What makes a helpful online review? A study of customer reviews on Amazon.com. MIS Quarterly, 34(1), 185–200. https://doi.org/10.2307/20721420
Nguyen, D. N., & Sharkasi, N. (2021, May). Towards an Understanding of the Intention to Engage on Facebook. In Advances in Digital Marketing and eCommerce: Second International Conference, 2021 (pp. 62–73). Springer International Publishing.
Omar, B., Apuke, O. D., & Nor, Z. M. (2023). The intrinsic and extrinsic factors predicting fake news sharing among social media users: The moderating role of fake news awareness. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04343-4
Panizza, F., Ronzani, P., Martini, C., Mattavelli, S., Morisseau, T., & Motterlini, M. (2022). Lateral reading and monetary incentives to spot disinformation about science. Scientific Reports, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-09168-y
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(5), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007
Pennycook, G., Bear, A., Collins, E. T., & Rand, D. G. (2020). The implied truth effect: Attaching warnings to a subset of fake news headlines increases perceived accuracy of headlines without warnings. Management Science, 66(11), 4944–4957. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3478
Pennycook, G., McPhetres, J., Zhang, Y., & Rand, D. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy nudge intervention. Psychological Science, 31, 770–780. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/uhbk9
Pennycook, G., Epstein, Z., Mosleh, M., Arechar, A. A., Eckles, D., & Rand, D. G. (2021). Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online. Nature, 592(7855), 590–595. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03344-2
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019). Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9
Roozenbeek, J., van der Linden, S., Goldberg, B., Rathje, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2022). Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media. Science Advances, 8(34). https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo6254
Shrout, P. E., & Bolger, N. (2002). Mediation in experimental and nonexperimental studies: New procedures and recommendations. Psychological Methods, 7(4), 422–445. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.7.4.422
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Wiley-Blackwell.
Swami, V., Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Furnham, A. (2014). Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories. Cognition, 133(3), 572–585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.08.006
Van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017). Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change. Global Challenges, 1(2), 1600008. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201600008
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Zhang, X. J., Ko, M., & Carpenter, D. (2016). Development of a scale to measure skepticism toward electronic word-of-mouth. Computers in Human Behavior, 56, 198–208.
Zhang, L., Wu, L., & Mattila, A. S. (2016). Online reviews: The role of information load and peripheral factors. Journal of Travel Research, 55(3), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287514559032
Zhou, X., & Zafarani, R. (2020). A survey of fake news: Fundamental theories, detection methods, and opportunities. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 53(5), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3395046
Zhuang, W., Zeng, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, C., & Fan, W. (2023). What makes user-generated content more helpful on social media platforms? Insights from creator interactivity perspective. Information Processing & Management, 60(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2022.103201
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1 The fake news tweet used in the study
Fake news tweet: If there is no bread, let them eat cake…
At the contractors’ conference that took place yesterday in a hall in Holon, Benjamin Netanyahu was asked about the rise in housing prices and said: “There is no choice. People must understand that there is no possibility of buying an apartment in the next decade. It’s time to say this clearly. People must give up on the dream of buying an apartment and realize that living in a rental is the only solution.”
Appendix 2 The priming critical thinking intervention treatments: Facebook “Tips to Spot False News”
-
1.
Be skeptical of headlines. False news stories often have catchy headlines in all caps with exclamation points. If shocking claims in the headline sound unbelievable, they probably are.
-
2.
Look closely at the URL. A phony or look-alike URL may be a warning sign of false news. Many false news sites mimic authentic news sources by making small changes to the URL. You can go to the site to compare the URL to established sources.
-
3.
Investigate the source. Ensure that the story is written by a source that you trust with a reputation for accuracy. If the story comes from an unfamiliar organization, check their “About” section to learn more.
-
4.
Watch for unusual formatting. Many false news sites have misspellings or awkward layouts. Read carefully if you see these signs.
-
5.
Consider the photos. False news stories often contain manipulated images or videos. Sometimes the photo may be authentic, but taken out of context. You can search for the photo or image to verify where it came from.
-
6.
Inspect the dates. False news stories may contain timelines that make no sense, or event dates that have been altered.
-
7.
Check the evidence. Check the author’s sources to confirm that they are accurate. Lack of evidence or reliance on unnamed experts may indicate a false news story.
-
8.
Look at other reports. If no other news source is reporting the same story, it may indicate that the story is false. If the story is reported by multiple sources you trust, it’s more likely to be true.
-
9.
Is the story a joke? Sometimes false news stories can be hard to distinguish from humor or satire. Check whether the source is known for parody, and whether the story’s details and tone suggest it may be just for fun.
-
10.
Some stories are intentionally false. Think critically about the stories you read, and only share news that you know to be credible.
[These tips are taken verbatim from the original tips published by Facebook (see https://www.facebook.com/help/188118808357379).]
Appendix 3 The experiential training intervention: the fake or real exercise adopted from the Israeli Institute for National Security Studies (INSS)
Instructions: In the link in front of you, there is an exercise for testing the identification of fake photos. After you click on the link, ten images will be displayed in front of you. Some are real, and some are fake (created by a machine). Please select real (green) or fake (red) as quickly as possible.
Appendix 4
Appendix 5
Appendix 6 The fake news and real news tweets used in the pilot study
Real news tweet: A substantial and simple solution to the housing crisis…
At the contractors’ conference that took place yesterday in a hall in Holon, Benjamin Netanyahu was asked about the rise in housing prices and said: “There are 300,000 housing units designated for accommodating 1.2 million residents. However, delays have arisen due to negotiations involving government authorities and the budget department. I pledge to lead a housing cabinet dedicated to swiftly releasing these units, offering a timely solution to the housing challenge.”
Fake news tweet: If there is no bread, let them eat cake…
At the contractors’ conference that took place yesterday in a hall in Holon, Benjamin Netanyahu was asked about the rise in housing prices and said: “There is no choice. People must understand that there is no possibility of buying an apartment in the next decade. It’s time to say this clearly. People must give up on the dream of buying an apartment and realize that living in a rental is the only solution.”
Appendix 7
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Alon, A.T., Rahimi, I.D. & Tahar, H. Fighting fake news on social media: a comparative evaluation of digital literacy interventions. Curr Psychol 43, 17343–17361 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05668-4
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-05668-4