IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v700y2022i1p152-164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Nudging Social Media toward Accuracy

Author

Listed:
  • Gordon Pennycook
  • David G. Rand

Abstract

A meaningful portion of online misinformation sharing is likely attributable to Internet users failing to consider accuracy when deciding what to share. As a result, simply redirecting attention to the concept of accuracy can increase sharing discernment. Here we discuss the importance of accuracy and describe a limited-attention utility model that is based on a theory about inattention to accuracy on social media. We review research that shows how a simple nudge or prompt that shifts attention to accuracy increases the quality of news that people share (typically by decreasing the sharing of false content), and then discuss outstanding questions relating to accuracy nudges, including the need for more work relating to persistence and habituation as well as the dearth of cross-cultural research on these topics. We also make several recommendations for policy-makers and social media companies for how to implement accuracy nudges.

Suggested Citation

  • Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand, 2022. "Nudging Social Media toward Accuracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 152-164, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:700:y:2022:i:1:p:152-164
    DOI: 10.1177/00027162221092342
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027162221092342
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00027162221092342?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. George J. Stigler, 1950. "The Development of Utility Theory. II," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58, pages 373-373.
    2. Cecilie S. Traberg & Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden, 2022. "Psychological Inoculation against Misinformation: Current Evidence and Future Directions," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 136-151, March.
    3. Andrew M. Guess & Brendan Nyhan & Jason Reifler, 2020. "Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 472-480, May.
    4. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience Theory of Choice Under Risk," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1243-1285.
    5. Gordon Pennycook & Ziv Epstein & Mohsen Mosleh & Antonio A. Arechar & Dean Eckles & David G. Rand, 2021. "Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online," Nature, Nature, vol. 592(7855), pages 590-595, April.
    6. Osmundsen, Mathias & Bor, Alexander & Vahlstrup, Peter Bjerregaard & Bechmann, Anja & Petersen, Michael Bang, 2021. "Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 115(3), pages 999-1015, August.
    7. Bence Bago & David Rand & Gordon Pennycook, 2020. "Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines," Post-Print hal-03477497, HAL.
    8. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    9. repec:oup:qjecon:v:128:y:2012:i:1:p:53-104 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gabriel Miao Li & Josh Pasek & Jon A. Krosnick & Tobias H. Stark & Jennifer Agiesta & Gaurav Sood & Trevor Tompson & Wendy Gross, 2022. "Americans’ Attitudes toward the Affordable Care Act: What Role Do Beliefs Play?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 41-54, March.

    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. Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2022. "Measuring exposure to misinformation from political elites on Twitter," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-9, December.
    2. Jana Lasser & Segun T. Aroyehun & Fabio Carrella & Almog Simchon & David Garcia & Stephan Lewandowsky, 2023. "From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by US politicians," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(12), pages 2140-2151, December.
    3. Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand, 2022. "Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Steve Rathje & Jon Roozenbeek & Jay J. Bavel & Sander Linden, 2023. "Accuracy and social motivations shape judgements of (mis)information," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(6), pages 892-903, June.
    5. Dertwinkel-Kalt, Markus & Köster, Mats, 2017. "Local thinking and skewness preferences," DICE Discussion Papers 248, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf Institute for Competition Economics (DICE).
    6. Sergei Guriev & Elias Papaioannou, 2022. "The Political Economy of Populism," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 753-832, September.
    7. Stephen G Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2021. "Household Portfolio Underdiversification and Probability Weighting: Evidence from the Field," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4524-4563.
    8. Douadia Bougherara & Lana Friesen & Céline Nauges, 2021. "Risk Taking with Left- and Right-Skewed Lotteries," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 62(1), pages 89-112, February.
    9. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    10. Tiziana Assenza & Alberto Cardaci & Stefanie J. Huber, 2024. "Fake News: Susceptibility, Awareness and Solutions," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 290, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    11. Mohamed Mostagir & James Siderius, 2022. "Learning in a Post-Truth World," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(4), pages 2860-2868, April.
    12. repec:hal:journl:hal-03533356 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:2:p:484-504 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Bago, Bence & Rosenzweig, Leah & Berinsky, Adam & Rand, David, 2021. "Emotion may predict susceptibility to fake news but emotion regulation does not help," IAST Working Papers 21-127, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    15. Robert M. Ross & David G. Rand & Gordon Pennycook, 2021. "Beyond “fake news†: Analytic thinking and the detection of false and hyperpartisan news headlines," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 484-504, March.
    16. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    17. Alexander J. Stewart & Antonio A. Arechar & David G. Rand & Joshua B. Plotkin, 2021. "The Game Theory of Fake News," Papers 2108.13687, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2023.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:4:p:365-385 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2018. "Losses loom larger than gains and reference dependent preferences in Bernoulli’s utility function," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 220-237.
    20. Fabio Padovano & Pauline Mille, 2023. "Education, fake news and the Political Budget Cycle," Economics Working Paper from Condorcet Center for political Economy at CREM-CNRS 2023-01-ccr, Condorcet Center for political Economy.
    21. Cullis, John & Jones, Philip & Lewis, Alan & Castiglioni, Cinzia & Lozza, Edoardo, 2015. "Do poachers make harsh gamekeepers? Attitudes to tax evasion and to benefit fraud," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 124-131.
    22. Bhavani Shanker Uppari & Sameer Hasija, 2019. "Modeling Newsvendor Behavior: A Prospect Theory Approach," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 481-500, July.
    23. Assenza, Tiziana & Cardaci, Alberto & Huber, Stefanie, 2024. "Fake News: Susceptibility, Awareness and Solutions," TSE Working Papers 24-1519, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).

    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:sae:anname:v:700:y:2022:i:1:p:152-164. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.