Sun Jikai, Pan Wenjing
School of Journalism and Communication, Renmin University of China.
Health Commun. 2025 Mar;40(3):361-371. doi: 10.1080/10410236.2024.2346674. Epub 2024 Apr 24.
The spread of misinformation, especially health-related misinformation has raised concerns globally. As an immediate remedy, fact-checking has been identified as an important solution. Adopting a 2 (source credibility: high vs. low) × 2 (source consistency: consistent vs. inconsistent) × 3 (ways of correction: human fact-checking vs. AI fact-checking vs. simple rebuttal) factorial design experiment ( = 754), this study examined how ways of correction and source consistency may affect individuals' intentions to share health misinformation correction on social media on two health topics: sunscreen safety and vaccine safety. Results showed that human and AI fact-checking correction elicited higher sharing intention compared to simple rebuttal. Correction coming from a different source than the original misinformation source elicited higher sharing intention, compared to correction from the same source. Perceived correction source credibility mediated the effects of ways of correction and source consistency on correction sharing intention. Theoretical and practical implications were discussed.
错误信息的传播，尤其是与健康相关的错误信息，已在全球范围内引发关注。作为一种即时补救措施，事实核查已被视为一项重要解决方案。本研究采用2（信息源可信度：高与低）×2（信息源一致性：一致与不一致）×3（纠正方式：人工事实核查与人工智能事实核查与简单反驳）析因设计实验（n = 754），考察了纠正方式和信息源一致性如何影响个体在社交媒体上分享两个健康主题（防晒霜安全性和疫苗安全性）的错误信息纠正内容的意愿。结果表明，与简单反驳相比，人工和人工智能事实核查纠正引发了更高的分享意愿。与来自同一信息源的纠正相比，来自与原始错误信息源不同的信息源的纠正引发了更高的分享意愿。感知到的纠正信息源可信度介导了纠正方式和信息源一致性对纠正分享意愿的影响。文中讨论了理论和实践意义。
