IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i5p2123-d330454.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Presumed Effects of “Fake News” on the Global Warming Discussion in a Cross-Cultural Context

Author

Listed:
  • Seong Choul Hong

    (Department of Media, Kyonggi University, Seoul 03746, Korea)

Abstract

“Fake news” on global warming is widely disseminated via social and partisan media. Scientists worry about its effect, because fake news may hurt public support and change policy on climate change. The current study tested the roles of cultural constructs (individualism, collectivism, and uncertainty-avoidance) in predicting the presumed effect of fake news on global warming. Based on 770 answers in four countries, the study found that individualism and collectivism influenced the presumed media effect on others and the third-person effect (self-other disparity of media effect). Moreover, the presumed media effect contributed to both preventive actions such as support for regulation on fake news and corrective actions such as a willingness to donate money. Likewise, the study found that collectivism positively predicted a willingness to donate money, while uncertainty-avoidance predicted support for regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Seong Choul Hong, 2020. "Presumed Effects of “Fake News” on the Global Warming Discussion in a Cross-Cultural Context," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:2123-:d:330454
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/2123/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/5/2123/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew S. Levendusky, 2013. "Why Do Partisan Media Polarize Viewers?," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(3), pages 611-623, July.
    2. Unknown, 2014. "Media Coverage 2014," 2014: Ethics, Efficiency and Food Security: Feeding the 9 Billion, Well, 26-28 August 2014 225573, Crawford Fund.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sendhil Mullainathan & Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "The Market for News," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1031-1053, September.
    2. Oliver Wagner & Thomas Adisorn & Lena Tholen & Dagmar Kiyar, 2020. "Surviving the Energy Transition: Development of a Proposal for Evaluating Sustainable Business Models for Incumbents in Germany’s Electricity Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, February.
    3. Garthwaite, K.A. & Collins, P.J. & Bambra, C., 2015. "Food for thought: An ethnographic study of negotiating ill health and food insecurity in a UK foodbank," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 38-44.
    4. Mohammad Reyaz, 2020. "Cyberspace in the Post-Soviet States: Assessing the Role of New Media in Central Asia," Jadavpur Journal of International Relations, , vol. 24(1), pages 7-27, June.
    5. Saad, Mohsen & Samet, Anis, 2020. "Collectivism and commonality in liquidity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 137-162.
    6. Koon-Magnin, Sarah, 2015. "Perceptions of and support for sex offender policies: Testing Levenson, Brannon, Fortney, and Baker’s findings," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 80-88.
    7. Pantea Kamrani & Isabelle Dorsch & Wolfgang G. Stock, 2021. "Do researchers know what the h-index is? And how do they estimate its importance?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5489-5508, July.
    8. Afful-Dadzie, Eric & Afful-Dadzie, Anthony, 2017. "Liberation of public data: Exploring central themes in open government data and freedom of information research," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 664-672.
    9. Michael Thaler, 2024. "The Fake News Effect: Experimentally Identifying Motivated Reasoning Using Trust in News," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(2), pages 1-38, May.
    10. Diana Tsoy & Danijela Godinic & Qingyan Tong & Bojan Obrenovic & Akmal Khudaykulov & Konstantin Kurpayanidi, 2022. "Impact of Social Media, Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) on the Intention to Stay at Home during the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-32, June.
    11. Oehler, Andreas & Schmitz, Jonas Tobias, 2021. "Does intensified communication of hedge funds with letters affect abnormal returns?," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 127-142.
    12. Yang, Xiaoping & Cao, Dongmei & Andrikopoulos, Panagiotis & Yang, Zonghan & Bass, Tina, 2020. "Online social networks, media supervision and investment efficiency: An empirical examination of Chinese listed firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    13. Yang Song, 2020. "The Mismatch Between Mutual Fund Scale and Skill," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(5), pages 2555-2589, October.
    14. Chen, Yangyang & Goyal, Abhinav & Veeraraghavan, Madhu & Zolotoy, Leon, 2020. "Terrorist attacks, investor sentiment, and the pricing of initial public offerings," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    15. Robert M. Bushman & Christopher D. Williams & Regina Wittenberg‐Moerman, 2017. "The Informational Role of the Media in Private Lending," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 115-152, March.
    16. Christy Glass & Alison Cook & Alicia R. Ingersoll, 2016. "Do Women Leaders Promote Sustainability? Analyzing the Effect of Corporate Governance Composition on Environmental Performance," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(7), pages 495-511, November.
    17. Michaely, Roni & Rubin, Amir & Vedrashko, Alexander, 2016. "Are Friday announcements special? Overcoming selection bias," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 65-85.
    18. Lambertini, Luisa & Mendicino, Caterina & Punzi, Maria Teresa, 2017. "Expectations-driven cycles in the housing market," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 297-312.
    19. Beatriz Barros & Ana Fernández-Zubieta & Raul Fidalgo-Merino & Francisco Triguero, 2018. "Scientific knowledge percolation process and social impact: A case study on the biotechnology and microbiology perceptions on Twitter," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 45(6), pages 804-814.
    20. T. Philipp Dybowski & J. Nikolaj Dybowski & Philipp Adämmer, 2016. "The Economic Effects of U.S. Presidential Tax Communication," CQE Working Papers 4916, Center for Quantitative Economics (CQE), University of Muenster.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:5:p:2123-:d:330454. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.