A value-driven approach to addressing misinformation in social media

Nadejda Komendantova (), Love Ekenberg, Mattias Svahn, Aron Larsson, Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah, Myrsini Glinos, Vasilis Koulolias and Mats Danielson
Additional contact information
Nadejda Komendantova: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Love Ekenberg: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)
Mattias Svahn: Stockholm University
Aron Larsson: Stockholm University
Syed Iftikhar Hussain Shah: International Hellenic University
Myrsini Glinos: Stockholm University
Vasilis Koulolias: Stockholm University
Mats Danielson: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA)

Palgrave Communications, 2021, vol. 8, issue 1, 1-12

Abstract: Abstract Misinformation in social media is an actual and contested policy problem given its outreach and the variety of stakeholders involved. In particular, increased social media use makes the spread of misinformation almost universal. Here we demonstrate a framework for evaluating tools for detecting misinformation using a preference elicitation approach, as well as an integrated decision analytic process for evaluating desirable features of systems for combatting misinformation. The framework was tested in three countries (Austria, Greece, and Sweden) with three groups of stakeholders (policymakers, journalists, and citizens). Multi-criteria decision analysis was the methodological basis for the research. The results showed that participants prioritised information regarding the actors behind the distribution of misinformation and tracing the life cycle of misinformative posts. Another important criterion was whether someone intended to delude others, which shows a preference for trust, accountability, and quality in, for instance, journalism. Also, how misinformation travels is important. However, all criteria that involved active contributions to dealing with misinformation were ranked low in importance, which shows that participants may not have felt personally involved enough in the subject or situation. The results also show differences in preferences for tools that are influenced by cultural background and that might be considered in the further development of tools.

Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-020-00702-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pal:palcom:v:8:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-020-00702-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.nature.com/palcomms/about

DOI: 10.1057/s41599-020-00702-9

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Palgrave Communications from Palgrave Macmillan
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().