• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

在肯尼亚和尼日利亚的社交媒体用户中抗击冠状病毒“信息疫情”。

Battling the coronavirus 'infodemic' among social media users in Kenya and Nigeria.

机构信息

Department of Political Science, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

Development Innovation Lab, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.

出版信息

Nat Hum Behav. 2024 May;8(5):823-834. doi: 10.1038/s41562-023-01810-7. Epub 2024 Mar 18.

DOI:10.1038/s41562-023-01810-7
PMID:38499773
Abstract

How can we induce social media users to be discerning when sharing information during a pandemic? An experiment on Facebook Messenger with users from Kenya (n = 7,498) and Nigeria (n = 7,794) tested interventions designed to decrease intentions to share COVID-19 misinformation without decreasing intentions to share factual posts. The initial stage of the study incorporated: (1) a factorial design with 40 intervention combinations; and (2) a contextual adaptive design, increasing the probability of assignment to treatments that worked better for previous subjects with similar characteristics. The second stage evaluated the best-performing treatments and a targeted treatment assignment policy estimated from the data. We precisely estimate null effects from warning flags and related article suggestions, tactics used by social media platforms. However, nudges to consider the accuracy of information reduced misinformation sharing relative to control by 4.9% (estimate = -2.3 percentage points, 95% CI = [-4.2, -0.35]). Such low-cost scalable interventions may improve the quality of information circulating online.

摘要

我们如何在大流行期间引导社交媒体用户在分享信息时具有辨别力?在肯尼亚(n=7498)和尼日利亚(n=7794)的 Facebook Messenger 用户中进行的一项实验测试了旨在减少分享 COVID-19 错误信息意图而不减少分享真实信息意图的干预措施。研究的初始阶段包括:(1) 具有 40 种干预组合的析因设计;(2) 上下文自适应设计,增加了对以前具有相似特征的主题效果更好的处理的分配概率。第二阶段评估了表现最好的治疗方法和从数据中估计的有针对性的治疗分配策略。我们准确估计了警告标志和相关文章建议的零效应,这些标志和建议是社交媒体平台使用的策略。然而,提示考虑信息的准确性使错误信息的分享相对控制组减少了 4.9%(估计值=-2.3 个百分点,95%置信区间=-4.2 到-0.35)。这种低成本的可扩展干预措施可能会提高在线传播信息的质量。

相似文献

1
Battling the coronavirus 'infodemic' among social media users in Kenya and Nigeria.在肯尼亚和尼日利亚的社交媒体用户中抗击冠状病毒“信息疫情”。
Nat Hum Behav. 2024 May;8(5):823-834. doi: 10.1038/s41562-023-01810-7. Epub 2024 Mar 18.
2
Mitigating the influence of message features on health misinformation sharing intention in social media: Experimental evidence for accuracy-nudge intervention.减轻社交媒体中信息特征对健康错误信息分享意愿的影响:准确性提示干预的实验证据。
Soc Sci Med. 2024 Sep;356:117136. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2024.117136. Epub 2024 Jul 15.
3
Characterizing the COVID-19 Infodemic on Chinese Social Media: Exploratory Study.描述中国社交媒体上的 COVID-19 信息疫情:探索性研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Feb 5;7(2):e26090. doi: 10.2196/26090.
4
"Thought I'd Share First" and Other Conspiracy Theory Tweets from the COVID-19 Infodemic: Exploratory Study.“我想率先分享”和其他有关 COVID-19 信息疫情的阴谋论推文:探索性研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Apr 14;7(4):e26527. doi: 10.2196/26527.
5
Self-certification: A novel method for increasing sharing discernment on social media.自我认证:一种提高社交媒体共享识别能力的新方法。
PLoS One. 2024 Jun 11;19(6):e0303025. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0303025. eCollection 2024.
6
Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation on Social Media: Experimental Evidence for a Scalable Accuracy-Nudge Intervention.社交媒体上抗击 COVID-19 错误信息:可扩展的准确性提示干预的实验证据。
Psychol Sci. 2020 Jul;31(7):770-780. doi: 10.1177/0956797620939054. Epub 2020 Jun 30.
7
Communication Is Not a Virus: COVID-19 Vaccine-Critical Activity on Facebook and Implications for the 'Infodemic' Concept.沟通并非病毒:脸书上与新冠疫苗相关的关键活动及其对“信息疫情”概念的影响
J Health Commun. 2022 Aug 3;27(8):563-573. doi: 10.1080/10810730.2022.2136307. Epub 2022 Oct 17.
8
Nudge-based misinformation interventions are effective in information environments with low misinformation prevalence.基于推动的错误信息干预在错误信息流行率低的信息环境中是有效的。
Sci Rep. 2024 May 20;14(1):11495. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-62286-7.
9
The Challenge of Debunking Health Misinformation in Dynamic Social Media Conversations: Online Randomized Study of Public Masking During COVID-19.揭穿动态社交媒体对话中健康错误信息的挑战:COVID-19 期间公众戴口罩的在线随机研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Mar 2;24(3):e34831. doi: 10.2196/34831.
10
Demographic Factors Influencing the Impact of Coronavirus-Related Misinformation on WhatsApp: Cross-sectional Questionnaire Study.影响 WhatsApp 上与冠状病毒相关错误信息影响的人口统计学因素:横断面问卷调查研究。
JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2021 Jan 30;7(1):e19858. doi: 10.2196/19858.

引用本文的文献

1
Twitter reveals spatio-temporal variation in vaccine concerns in Sub-Saharan Africa.推特揭示了撒哈拉以南非洲地区对疫苗担忧的时空变化。
medRxiv. 2025 Aug 24:2025.08.19.25334033. doi: 10.1101/2025.08.19.25334033.
2
Uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine and its association with vaccine information and misinformation in Malawi.马拉维新冠疫苗的接种情况及其与疫苗信息和错误信息的关联。
Commun Med (Lond). 2025 Jun 21;5(1):244. doi: 10.1038/s43856-025-00864-0.
3
Testing theories of political persuasion using AI.利用人工智能检验政治说服理论。

本文引用的文献

1
The social media context interferes with truth discernment.社交媒体语境会干扰真相识别。
Sci Adv. 2023 Mar 3;9(9):eabo6169. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abo6169.
2
Sharing of misinformation is habitual, not just lazy or biased.错误信息的分享是习惯性的,不仅仅是因为懒惰或偏见。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Jan 24;120(4):e2216614120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2216614120. Epub 2023 Jan 17.
3
The global effectiveness of fact-checking: Evidence from simultaneous experiments in Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom.事实核查的全球有效性:来自阿根廷、尼日利亚、南非和英国同时进行的实验的证据。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2025 May 6;122(18):e2412815122. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2412815122. Epub 2025 May 2.
4
The complex interplay between risk tolerance and the spread of infectious diseases.风险承受能力与传染病传播之间的复杂相互作用。
J R Soc Interface. 2025 Apr;22(225):20240486. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2024.0486. Epub 2025 Apr 23.
5
Correcting misinformation about the Russia-Ukraine War reduces false beliefs but does not change views about the War.纠正有关俄乌战争的错误信息会减少错误信念,但不会改变人们对战争的看法。
PLoS One. 2024 Sep 23;19(9):e0307090. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307090. eCollection 2024.
6
Investigating the role of source and source trust in prebunks and debunks of misinformation in online experiments across four EU countries.调查在四个欧盟国家的在线实验中,信息源和信息源信任在虚假信息的预先反驳和反驳中的作用。
Sci Rep. 2024 Sep 5;14(1):20723. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-71599-6.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Sep 14;118(37). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2104235118.
4
Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online.将注意力转移到准确性上可以减少网络上的错误信息。
Nature. 2021 Apr;592(7855):590-595. doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03344-2. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
5
Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA.测量 COVID-19 疫苗错误信息对英国和美国疫苗接种意愿的影响。
Nat Hum Behav. 2021 Mar;5(3):337-348. doi: 10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1. Epub 2021 Feb 5.
6
Timing matters when correcting fake news.纠正假新闻要把握时机。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2021 Feb 2;118(5). doi: 10.1073/pnas.2020043118.
7
Assessing the risks of 'infodemics' in response to COVID-19 epidemics.评估应对 COVID-19 疫情“信息疫情”的风险。
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Dec;4(12):1285-1293. doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-00994-6. Epub 2020 Oct 29.
8
Countering misinformation via WhatsApp: Preliminary evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic in Zimbabwe.通过 WhatsApp 对抗错误信息:来自津巴布韦 COVID-19 大流行的初步证据。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 14;15(10):e0240005. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240005. eCollection 2020.
9
Searching for the Backfire Effect: Measurement and Design Considerations.探寻逆火效应:测量与设计考量
J Appl Res Mem Cogn. 2020 Sep;9(3):286-299. doi: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2020.06.006. Epub 2020 Sep 2.
10
A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India.数字媒体素养干预措施提高了美国和印度民众辨别主流新闻和虚假新闻的能力。
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jul 7;117(27):15536-15545. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1920498117. Epub 2020 Jun 22.