IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/jinfst/v73y2022i10p1365-1386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The emerging science of content labeling: Contextualizing social media content moderation

Author

Listed:
  • Garrett Morrow
  • Briony Swire‐Thompson
  • Jessica Montgomery Polny
  • Matthew Kopec
  • John P. Wihbey

Abstract

In the online information ecosystem, a content label is an attachment to a piece of content intended to contextualize that content for the viewer. Content labels are information about information, such as fact‐checks or sensitive content warnings. Research into content labeling is nascent, but growing; researchers have made strides toward understanding labeling best practices to deal with issues such as disinformation, and misleading content that may affect everything from voting to health. To make this review tractable, we focus on compiling the literature that can contextualize labeling effects and consequences. This review summarizes the central labeling literature, highlights gaps for future research, discusses considerations for social media, and explores definitions toward a taxonomy. Specifically, this article discusses the particulars of content labels, their presentation, and the effects of various labels. The current literature can guide the usage of labels on social media platforms and inform public debate over platform moderation.

Suggested Citation

  • Garrett Morrow & Briony Swire‐Thompson & Jessica Montgomery Polny & Matthew Kopec & John P. Wihbey, 2022. "The emerging science of content labeling: Contextualizing social media content moderation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(10), pages 1365-1386, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:jinfst:v:73:y:2022:i:10:p:1365-1386
    DOI: 10.1002/asi.24637
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24637
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/asi.24637?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. Rodney Duffett, 2020. "The YouTube Marketing Communication Effect on Cognitive, Affective and Behavioural Attitudes among Generation Z Consumers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-25, June.
    2. Vincent C. Conzola & Michael S. Wogalter, 2001. "A Communication--Human Information Processing (C--HIP) approach to warning effectiveness in the workplace," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 4(4), pages 309-322, October.
    3. Sanghee Oh & Sue Yeon Syn, 2015. "Motivations for sharing information and social support in social media: A comparative analysis of Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, and Flickr," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 66(10), pages 2045-2060, October.
    4. Gordon Pennycook & Adam Bear & Evan T. Collins & David G. Rand, 2020. "The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4944-4957, November.
    5. Berinsky, Adam J., 2017. "Rumors and Health Care Reform: Experiments in Political Misinformation," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 241-262, April.
    6. Yeh, D. Adeline & Gomez, Miguel I. & Kaiser, Harry M., 2019. "Signaling Impacts of GMO Labeling on Fruit and Vegetable Demand," 2019 Annual Meeting, July 21-23, Atlanta, Georgia 290866, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    7. Kent D. Messer & Marco Costanigro & Harry M. Kaiser, 2017. "Labeling Food Processes: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly," Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 39(3), pages 407-427.
    8. Russell Golman & David Hagmann & George Loewenstein, 2017. "Information Avoidance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 55(1), pages 96-135, March.
    9. Jon Roozenbeek & Sander Linden, 2019. "Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. Philipp Lorenz-Spreen & Stephan Lewandowsky & Cass R. Sunstein & Ralph Hertwig, 2020. "How behavioural sciences can promote truth, autonomy and democratic discourse online," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 1102-1109, November.
    11. Barry Wellman, 2001. "Physical Place and Cyberplace: The Rise of Personalized Networking," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 227-252, June.
    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. Nitin Verma & Kenneth R. Fleischmann & Le Zhou & Bo Xie & Min Kyung Lee & Kate Rich & Kristina Shiroma & Chenyan Jia & Tara Zimmerman, 2022. "Trust in COVID‐19 public health information," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(12), pages 1776-1792, December.

    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. Danielle Caled & Mário J. Silva, 2022. "Digital media and misinformation: An outlook on multidisciplinary strategies against manipulation," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 123-159, May.
    2. Cameron Martel & Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2021. "You’re Definitely Wrong, Maybe: Correction Style Has Minimal Effect on Corrections of Misinformation Online," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 120-133.
    3. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2021. "The Demand for Fact Checking," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 563, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    4. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2022. "Do people demand fact-checked news? Evidence from U.S. Democrats," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    5. Folco Panizza & Piero Ronzani & Tiffany Morisseau & Simone Mattavelli & Carlo Martini, 2023. "How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    7. Eric K. Clemons & Andrej Savin & Maximilian Schreieck & Stina Teilmann-Lock & Jan Trzaskowski & Ravi Waran, 2024. "A face of one’s own: The role of an online personae in a digital age and the right to control one’s own online personae in the presence of digital hacking," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-16, December.
    8. Cameron Martel & Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2021. "You’re Definitely Wrong, Maybe: Correction Style Has Minimal Effect on Corrections of Misinformation Online," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 120-133.
    9. Tobia Spampatti & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Evelina Trutnevyte & Tobias Brosch, 2024. "Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 380-398, February.
    10. Momsen, Katharina & Ohndorf, Markus, 2020. "Information Avoidance, Selective Exposure, and Fake(?) News - A Market Experiment," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224637, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Nour El Houda Ben Amor & Mohamed Nabil Mzoughi, 2023. "Do Millennials’ Motives for Using Snapchat Influence the Effectiveness of Snap Ads?," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(3), pages 21582440231, July.
    12. MacFarlane, Douglas & Hurlstone, Mark J. & Ecker, Ullrich K.H., 2020. "Protecting consumers from fraudulent health claims: A taxonomy of psychological drivers, interventions, barriers, and treatments," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 259(C).
    13. Fulian Yin & Meiqi Ji & Zhongliang Yang & Zhaoliang Wu & Xinyu Xia & Tongtong Xing & Yuwei She & Zhiwen Hu, 2022. "Exploring the determinants of global vaccination campaigns to combat COVID-19," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-13, December.
    14. Perrotta Berlin, Maria & Mandl, Benjamin, 2020. "Selective attention and the importance of types for information campaigns," SITE Working Paper Series 53, Stockholm School of Economics, Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
    15. Jannis Engel & Nora Szech, 2020. "A little good is good enough: Ethical consumption, cheap excuses, and moral self-licensing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-19, January.
    16. Prati, Alberto & Saucet, Charlotte, 2024. "The causal effect of a health treatment on beliefs, stated preferences and memories," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Aharon, David Y. & Qadan, Mahmoud, 2020. "When do retail investors pay attention to their trading platforms?," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    18. Zeng, Jing & Duan, Hongyu & Zhu, Weiwei & Song, Jingyan, 2024. "Understanding residents’ risk information seeking, processing and sharing regarding waste incineration power projects," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 304(C).
    19. repec:osf:osfxxx:cgj6w_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Lordan, Grace & Lekfuangfu, Warn N., 2023. "Stephen versus Stephanie? Does Gender Matter for Peer-to-Peer Career Advice," IZA Discussion Papers 16161, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    21. Buckell, John & Hess, Stephane, 2019. "Stubbing out hypothetical bias: improving tobacco market predictions by combining stated and revealed preference data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C), pages 93-102.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:bla:jinfst:v:73:y:2022:i:10:p:1365-1386. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.asis.org .

    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.