Information Credibility Assessment Research Articles

Distributed control for flock navigation using nonlinear model predictive control

We present a novel approach that employs nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) to address flock control while incorporating obstacle avoidance within a leader-follower framework. This strategy utilises each agent's predictive capabilities to navigate effectively. Building upon Reynolds' foundational flocking principles of cohesion, separation, and alignment, we adapt them to serve a navigation objective rather than focusing solely on formation tasks. In doing so, we introduce novel concepts that enhance our approach's robustness and flexibility. These concepts include the assessment of information credibility and significance received from neighbouring agents, along with the dynamic adjustment of trade-offs between reference values. We incorporate these features into our NMPC formulation and illustrate their advantages through numerical simulations and laboratory experiments.

Does knowledge make a difference? Understanding how the lay public and experts assess the credibility of information on novel foods.

Drawing on Metzger's dual-processing model of credibility assessment, this study examines how individuals with varying topical knowledge (laypersons vs experts) assess the credibility of information on novel foods. Online focus group discussions reveal that both groups share similar motivations for assessing the credibility of information on novel foods (e.g. personal relevance and concerns about the impact of unverified information on others). However, they differ in the barriers they encounter during the assessment of information credibility. Both groups employ analytical (e.g. evaluating content quality) and intuitive methods (e.g. looking at source credibility) to assess the credibility of novel food-related information. However, they differ in the cues used for credibility assessment. Laypersons tend to rely on superficial heuristics (e.g. social endorsement cues or surface features), whereas experts rely more on content features and scientific knowledge to evaluate information credibility. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Psychological Inoculation for Credibility Assessment, Sharing Intention, and Discernment of Misinformation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The prevalence of misinformation poses a substantial threat to individuals' daily lives, necessitating the deployment of effective remedial approaches. One promising strategy is psychological inoculation, which pre-emptively immunizes individuals against misinformation attacks. However, uncertainties remain regarding the extent to which psychological inoculation effectively enhances the capacity to differentiate between misinformation and real information. To reduce the potential risk of misinformation about digital health, this study aims to examine the effectiveness of psychological inoculation in countering misinformation with a focus on several factors, including misinformation credibility assessment, real information credibility assessment, credibility discernment, misinformation sharing intention, real information sharing intention, and sharing discernment. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a meta-analysis by searching 4 databases (Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, Proquest, and PubMed) for empirical studies based on inoculation theory and outcome measure-related misinformation published in the English language. Moderator analyses were used to examine the differences in intervention strategy, intervention type, theme, measurement time, team, and intervention design. Based on 42 independent studies with 42,530 subjects, we found that psychological inoculation effectively reduces misinformation credibility assessment (d=-0.36, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23; P<.001) and improves real information credibility assessment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.33; P=.005) and real information sharing intention (d=0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.16; P=.003). However, psychological inoculation does not significantly influence misinformation sharing intention (d=-0.35, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.09; P=.12). Additionally, we find that psychological inoculation effectively enhances credibility discernment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.13-0.28; P<.001) and sharing discernment (d=0.18, 95% CI 0.12-0.24; P<.001). Regarding health misinformation, psychological inoculation effectively decreases misinformation credibility assessment and misinformation sharing intention. The results of the moderator analyses showed that content-based, passive inoculation was more effective in increasing credibility and sharing intention. The theme of climate change demonstrates a stronger effect on real information credibility. Comparing intervention types showed that pre-post interventions are more effective for misinformation credibility assessment, while post-only interventions are better for credibility discernment. This study indicated that psychological inoculation enhanced individuals' ability to discern real information from misinformation and share real information. Incorporating psychological inoculation to cultivate an informed public is crucial for societal resilience against misinformation threats in an age of information proliferation. As a scalable and cost-effective intervention strategy, institutions can apply psychological inoculation to mitigate potential misinformation crises.

Transnational Chinese students’ online information literacies during the COVID-19 pandemic

Using a transnational lens, this narrative study examines the online information literacies of six Chinese international graduate students in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. The data of the study were collected from phenomenological interviewing, weekly information-seeking dairies, and focus group discussions. This study illuminates Chinese international students’ transnational information literacies in navigating the pandemic online information environment. These students stayed attuned with the pandemic conditions and relevant regulations in order to inform their important decision-making concerning health, safety, visa issues, and international travel. The study also highlights participants' cultural ways of information seeking and pragmatic approaches to information credibility assessment. Results from the study show the importance of understanding and empowering the information literacy of international students, especially during a global health emergency.

Scientific Information Literacy: Adaption of Concepts and an Investigation Into the Chinese Public

Many studies have developed the concepts and measurements of scientific and information literacy. However, the changes in the media environment, the complexity of scientific information, and low entry barriers have brought new challenges to scientific information communication. A single scientific or information literacy concept cannot provide a clear overview of the competencies and literacy required for individuals to access scientific information in new media contexts. This study aims to adapt the existing concepts and measurement frameworks related to information literacy in science communication and to investigate scientific information literacy and the demographic differences among the Chinese public through a cross-sectional survey (&lt;em&gt;N&lt;/em&gt; = 2,983). The results showed that compared to self-directed information acquisition, accurate information filtering, and information sharing and dissemination, the Chinese public has relatively lower levels of information credibility assessment and opinion expression. Besides, the scientific literacy levels among the Chinese public had significant differences according to gender, age, and education. This study argues that adapting current information literacy concepts into science communication can promote public understanding of scientific information. The concept of scientific information literacy should be considered as a means of understanding the impact of new media on scientific information communication. The contribution of this study is that it adapts existing concepts into a novel context, further enriching the empirical research on scientific literacy and the research perspective on science communication.

Help Me #DebunkThis: Unpacking Individual and Community's Collaborative Work in Information Credibility Assessment

The wide spread of misinformation contributes to information consumers' excessed distrust of online information. To cope, information consumers are often actively involved in checking the credibility of information through self-researching or seeking help and opinions from experts and peers. While previous studies investigated the factors that affect people's perceptions of information credibility and how laypeople's judgements compare to experts, little is known about how the information credibility assessment work is performed and cooperated by individuals and communities in real-life, natural online environments. Through a qualitative study of an online community, r/DebunkThis, which is dedicated to information debunking, we found that online information debunking rarely followed a linear and straightforward path. Rather, community members, including the debunkers and the original posters, constantly negotiated, and interacted with each other to determine what to debunk and how to debunk. Individuals adopted various strategies to debunk information, such as questioning the credibility of the information source and citing authoritative external information. Community members supplemented with details and explanations, corrected others, requested clarifications, summarized high-level knowledge and skills, and interacted socially based on individuals' debunking explanations. Our study results broaden the understanding of debunking not only as an outcome but also as a learning and social process for community members to learn high-level debunking skills and form and enforce community rules. We provide implications for designing community and crowd-based information debunking systems which should recognize the complex, cooperative, and socially situated work of community and crowd debunkers. The design of such systems should therefore support not only labeling information as correct or not or simply sharing alternative information sources, but also community interactions and learning processes, as well as recognizing the labor of community debunkers.

Active Annotation in Evaluating the Credibility of Web-Based Medical Information: Guidelines for Creating Training Data Sets for Machine Learning.

BackgroundThe spread of false medical information on the web is rapidly accelerating. Establishing the credibility of web-based medical information has become a pressing necessity. Machine learning offers a solution that, when properly deployed, can be an effective tool in fighting medical misinformation on the web.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to present a comprehensive framework for designing and curating machine learning training data sets for web-based medical information credibility assessment. We show how to construct the annotation process. Our main objective is to support researchers from the medical and computer science communities. We offer guidelines on the preparation of data sets for machine learning models that can fight medical misinformation.MethodsWe begin by providing the annotation protocol for medical experts involved in medical sentence credibility evaluation. The protocol is based on a qualitative study of our experimental data. To address the problem of insufficient initial labels, we propose a preprocessing pipeline for the batch of sentences to be assessed. It consists of representation learning, clustering, and reranking. We call this process active annotation.ResultsWe collected more than 10,000 annotations of statements related to selected medical subjects (psychiatry, cholesterol, autism, antibiotics, vaccines, steroids, birth methods, and food allergy testing) for less than US $7000 by employing 9 highly qualified annotators (certified medical professionals), and we release this data set to the general public. We developed an active annotation framework for more efficient annotation of noncredible medical statements. The application of qualitative analysis resulted in a better annotation protocol for our future efforts in data set creation.ConclusionsThe results of the qualitative analysis support our claims of the efficacy of the presented method.

Information Credibility Evaluation in Presence of Users’ Safety in New Retailing

Understanding users’ safety perception of the credibility of web-based information has become increasingly important in the context of new retailing. This study extends the existing literature by exploring the factors influencing information credibility in the context of new retailing. Based on the technology acceptance model and the rational behavior theory, a theoretical model for the assessment of information credibility in new retailing was developed. We analyzed the factors influencing users’ safety preference toward information communication procedures and information credibility in new retailing based on two aspects: perceived information quality and user judgment motivation. The reliability and validity of the model measure were analyzed, and structural equation modeling was used to test the model hypotheses. The following results were obtained: (1) Authenticity, accuracy, and practicability positively affected the perceived information quality of new retailing information; (2) User judgment motivation had a positive impact on information users’ safety preference and information credibility; (3) Users’ safety preference positively affected information credibility; (4) Information acquisition, social interaction, and self-identity positively affected the perceived credibility of new retailing information.

Social embeddedness of persuasion: effects of cognitive social structures on information credibility assessment and sharing in social media

Implicit in prior research has been the assumption that any judgment about the credibility and value of information is made in an individualistic and socially isolated fashion. This assumption is no longer tenable in a social media environment wherein people are exposed to a great deal of information selectively fed to them by others with whom they have relationships. The current study examines the moderating effects of cognitive social structures manifested in the minds of social media users. The findings reveal that consideration of individuals regarding source expertise for credibility assessment and information-sharing decisions varies depending on their particular online social circumstances and how the individuals perceive these circumstances. This suggests that the manner in which people assess and share information in the social media environment is partly a function of how they make sense of their local social worlds.

Positive vs. Negative Framing of Scientific Information on Facebook Using Peripheral Cues: An Eye-Tracking Study of the Credibility Assessment Process

Aim/Purpose: To examine how positive/negative message framing – based on peripheral cues (regarding popularity, source, visuals, and hyperlink) – affects perceptions of credibility of scientific information posted on social networking sites (in this case, Facebook), while exploring the mechanisms of viewing the different components. Background: Credibility assessment of information is a key skill in today's information society. However, it is a demanding cognitive task, which is impossible to perform for every piece of online information. Additionally, message framing — that is, the context and approach used to construct information— may impact perceptions of credibility. In practice, people rely on various cues and cognitive heuristics to determine whether they think a piece of content is true or not. In social networking sites, content is usually enriched by additional information (e.g., popularity), which may impact the users' perceived credibility of the content. Methodology: A quantitative controlled experiment was designed (N=19 undergraduate students), collecting fine grained data with an eye tracking camera, while analyzing it using transition graphs. Contribution: The findings on the mechanisms of that process, enabled by the use of eye tracking data, point to the different roles of specific peripheral cues, when the message is overall peripherally positive or negative. It also contributes to the theoretical literature on framing effects in science communication, as it highlights the peripheral cues that make a strong frame. Findings: The positively framed status was perceived, as expected from the Elaboration Likelihood Model, more credible than the negatively framed status, demonstrating the effects of the visual framing. Differences in participants' mechanisms of assessing credibility between the two scenarios were evident in the specific ways the participants examined the various status components. Recommendations for Practitioners: As part of digital literacy education, major focus should be given to the role of peripheral cues on credibility assessment in social networking sites. Educators should emphasize the mechanisms by which these cues interact with message framing, so Internet users would be encouraged to reflect upon their own credibility assessment skills, and eventually improve them. Recommendation for Researchers: The use of eye tracking data may help in collecting and analyzing fine grained data on credibility assessment processes, and on Internet behavior at large. The data shown here may shed new light on previously studied phenomena, enabling a more nuanced understanding of them. Impact on Society: In an era when Internet users are flooded with information that can be created by virtually anyone, credibility assessment skills have become ever more important, hence the prominence of this skill. Improving citizens' assessment of information credibility — to which we believe this study contributes — results on a greater impact on society. Future Research: The role of peripheral cues and of message framing should be studied in other contexts (not just scientific news) and in other platforms. Additional peripheral cues not tested here should be also taken into consideration (e.g., connections between the information consumer and the information sharer, or the type of the leading image).

A neural computing approach to the construction of information credibility assessments for online social networks

Information credibility assessment has traditionally been understood in the online information processing context. This study extends this literature by exploring information credibility assessment mechanisms in the online social network context. In doing so, it responds to the emerging call for an understanding of the online social network context under the operational mechanism of information credibility assessment. Specifically, this study proposes a neural computing approach based on the stimulate–organism–response framework to determine the process, strategy and clue of online social network information assessment. Drawing on the theory of the Technology Acceptance Model and the theory of reasoned action, and based on a survey of 399 returned online questionnaires, we find that the involvement of online social network information, information sources and information transfer channels has a significant positive correlation with information usefulness and credibility, while information scenarios have no significant impact on usefulness and credibility, and the credibility of information is significant to the user’s information adoption behavior. Different from the predictions made in the literature, the information scenario does not affect information credibility and information usefulness. Conclusions and academic and practical implications are discussed.

New sources of information and their use in decision-making

The opportunities of using traditional and new sources of information, including statistical data, in decision-making under uncertainty were analysed. Special attention was paid to the relationship between the availability of information about the particular decision-making situation and the interpretation as well as estimation of probability as a measure of uncertainty. Subsequently, an assessment of information credibility and quality obtained from statistical research and Big Data used in decision-making was highlighted. This kind of evaluation offers additional perspective on the analysis of decision-making situation, called the knowledge dimension.

AUTOMATED CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENT ON TWITTER

In this paper, we make a practical approach to automated credibility assessment on Twitter. We describe the process behind the design of an automated classi- fier for information credibility assessment. As an addition, we propose practical implementation of TwitterBOT, a tool which is able to score submitted tweets while working in the native Twitter interface.

A MODEL FOR RECALIBRATING CREDIBILITY IN DIFFERENT CONTEXTS AND LANGUAGES - A TWITTER CASE STUDY

Due to the growing dependence on the WWW UserGenerated Content (UGC) as a primary source for information and news, the research on web credibility is becoming more important than ever before. In this paper we review previous efforts to evaluate information credibility, focusing specifically on microblogging. In particular, we provide a comparison of different systems for automatic assessment of information credibility based on the used techniques and features, and we classify the Twitter credibility surveys based on the features considered. We then propose a general model to assess information credibility on UGC different platforms, including Twitter, which employs a contextual credibility approach that examines the effect of culture, situation, topic variations, and languages on assessing credibility, using Arabic context as an example. We identify several factors that users may consider in determining credibility, and argue that the importance of each factor may vary with a context. Future work will include both a user study and machine learning techniques to evaluate the effectiveness of various factors for information credibility classification in different contexts.

Participatory Web Users’ Information Activities and Credibility Assessment

Assessment of information credibility is a ubiquitous human activity given that people constantly make decisions and selections based on the value of information in a variety of information seeking and use contexts. Today, people are increasingly engaging in diverse online activities beyond searching for and reading information, including activities such as creating, tagging and rating content, shopping, and listening to and watching multimedia content. The Web 2.0 environment presents new challenges for people because the burden of information evaluation is shifted from professional gatekeepers to individual information consumers. At the same time, however, it also provides unprecedented opportunities for people to use tools and features that help them to make informed credibility judgments by relying on other people's ratings and recommendations. This paper introduces fundamental notions and dimensions of credibility, and contends that credibility assessment can be best understood with respect to human information behavior because it encompasses both the level of effort people exert as well as the heuristics they employ to evaluate information. The paper reports on a survey study investigating people's credibility judgments with respect to online information, focusing on the constructs, heuristics, and interactions involved in people's credibility assessment processes within the context of their everyday life information activities. Using an online activity diary method, empirical data about people's online activities and their associated credibility assessments were collected at multiple points throughout the day for three days. The results indicate that distinct credibility assessment heuristics are emerging as people engage in diverse online activities involving more user-generated and multimedia content. A heuristic approach suggests that people apply mental shortcuts or rules of thumb in order to minimize the amount of cognitive effort and time required to make credibility judgments. The paper discusses why a heuristic approach is key to reaching a more comprehensive understanding of people's credibility assessments within the information-abundant online environment.