题名

從素養到行動：探討公民線上推理能力與查證分享行為的關係

并列篇名

From literacy to Action: Investigating the Relationship between Civic Online Reasoning and Fact-Checking Before Sharing in the Context of Misinformation

DOI

10.29843/JCCIS.202307_(45).0003

作者

施琮仁(Tsung-Jen Shih )

关键词

不實訊息防治 ； 反事實分析 ； 公民線上推理能力 ； 橋接型社會資本 ； 查證分享行為 ； Civic Online Reasoning ； Counterfactual Analysis ； Fact-checking before Sharing ； False Information ； Bridging Social Capital

期刊名称

資訊社會研究

卷期/出版年月

45期（2023 / 07 / 01）

页次

51 - 89

内容语文

繁體中文;英文
中文摘要

近來學者們開始推廣「公民線上推理能力」，試圖透過提升人們評估網路訊息的技巧，減少不實訊息的傳播。然而，相關研究主要檢視工作坊在培養該能力上的角色，並未關注其他的養成管道（例如媒體與人際網絡結構），也未探索可此能力是否具有效用，本研究彌補此一研究缺口。本研究運用台灣傳播調查資料庫第二期第四次調查資料，探討公民線上推理能力形成的因素，以及和查證分享行為之間的關係。反事實分析結果發現，公民線上推理能力和查證分享行為有正面關係，而結構方程模型結果亦指出公民線上推理能力能透過不實訊息影響感知產生間接效果。此外，較常觀看網路新聞、接觸網路名人，以及橋接型社會資本較多的民眾，公民線上推理能力也較高。
英文摘要

The emergence of social media has increased the speed and scope of disseminating false information. Combating misinformation has, therefore, become one of the most pressing issues in countries around the world, including Taiwan. Among various means of prevention, the skills of evaluating online content are especially important, also known as "civic online reasoning" (COR). However, most studies in this field focused on the role of workshops in facilitating COR and did not examine the utility of it. This study explores other factors that contribute to the development of COR, with a particular emphasis on the effect of media use and social capital. The current study is also one of very few research that investigates the "fact-checking before sharing" behavior. Based on the 2020 Taiwan Communication Survey, the results of the counterfactual analysis show a positive relationship between COR and fact-checking before sharing. The structural equation model indicates that COR is indirectly associated with fact-checking before sharing through the perceived impact of false information. In addition, people who frequently consume online news, engage with online opinion leaders, and have more bridging social capital also have higher levels of COR.
主题分类 基礎與應用科學 > 資訊科學
社會科學 > 社會學
社會科學 > 傳播學
参考文献
  1. 侯佩君,杜素豪,廖培珊,洪永泰,章英華(2008)。台灣鄉鎮市區類型之研究：「台灣社會變遷基本調查」第五期計畫之抽樣分層效果分析。調查研究－方法與應用，23，7-32。
    連結：
  2. Abdulai, A.-F.,Tiffere, A.-H.,Adam, F.,Kabanunye, M. M.(2021).COVID-19 information-related digital literacy among online health consumers in a low-income country.International Journal of Medical Informatics,145,104322.
  3. Adger, W. N.(2003).Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change.Economic Geography,79(4),387-404.
  4. Allcott, H.,Gentzkow, M.(2017).Social media and fake news in the 2016 election.Journal of Economic Perspectives,31(2),211-236.
  5. Atkinson, T. M.,Salz, T.,Touza, K. K.,Li, Y.,Hay, J. L.(2015).Does colorectal cancer risk perception predict screening behavior? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of Behavioral Medicine,38(6),837-850.
  6. Bakker, T. P.,De Vreese, C. H.(2011).Good news for the future? Young people, Internet use, and political participation.Communication Research,38(4),451-470.
  7. Bandura, A.(1982).Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency.American Psychologist,37(2),122.
  8. Barthel, M., Mitchell, A., & Holcomb, J. (2016). Many Americans believe fake news is sowing confusion. Retrieved December 27 from https://www.journalism.org/2016/12/15/many-americans-believe-fake-news-is-sowing-confusion/
  9. Beam, M. A.,Hutchens, M. J.,Hmielowski, J. D.(2020).Facebook news and (de) polarization: Reinforcing spirals in the 2016 US election.Digital Media, Political Polarization and Challenges to Democracy
  10. Becker, S. O.,Caliendo, M.(2007).Sensitivity analysis for average treatment effects.The Stata Journal,7(1),71-83.
  11. Bennett, W. L.,Manheim, J. B.(2006).The one-step flow of communication.The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,608(1),213-232.
  12. Bovet, A.,Makse, H. A.(2019).Influence of fake news in Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election.Nature Communications,10(1),7.
  13. Bozdag, E.,van den Hoven, J.(2015).Breaking the filter bubble: democracy and design.Ethics and Information Technology,17(4),249-265.
  14. Brewer, N. T.,Chapman, G. B.,Gibbons, F. X.,Gerrard, M.,McCaul, K. D.,Weinstein, N. D.(2007).Meta-analysis of the relationship between risk perception and health behavior: The example of vaccination.Health Psychology,26(2),136-145.
  15. Brossard, D.(2013).New media landscapes and the science information consumer.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,110(Supplement 3),14096-14101.
  16. Browne, M. W.,Cudeck, R.(1992).Alternative ways of assessing model fit.Sociological Methods & Research,21(2),230-258.
  17. Bubeck, P.,Wouter Botzen, W.,Laudan, J.,Aerts, J. C.,Thieken, A. H.(2018).Insights into flood-coping appraisals of protection motivation theory: Empirical evidence from Germany and France.Risk Analysis,38(6),1239-1257.
  18. Bulgurcu, B.,Cavusoglu, H.,Benbasat, I.(2010).Information security policy compliance: an empirical study of rationality-based beliefs and information security awareness.MIS Quarterly,523-548.
  19. Burbules, N. C.(1998).Rhetorics of the Web: Hyperreading and critical literacy.Page to screen: Taking literacy into the electronic era,London:
  20. Chang, C.(2021).Fake news: Audience perceptions and concerted coping strategies.Digital Journalism,9(5),636-659.
  21. Chang, C.(2020).Self-control-centered empowerment model: Health consciousness and health knowledge as drivers of empowerment-seeking through health communication.Health Communication,35(12),1497-1508.
  22. Coiro, J.,Coscarelli, C.,Maykel, C.,Forzani, E.(2015).Investigating criteria that seventh graders use to evaluate the quality of online information.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,59(3),287-297.
  23. DeVito, M. A.(2017).From Editors to algorithms.Digital Journalism,5(6),753-773.
  24. Diehl, T.,Lee, S.(2022).Testing the cognitive involvement hypothesis on social media: "News finds me" perceptions, partisanship, and fake news credibility.Computers in Human Behavior,128,107121.
  25. Dubois, E.,Minaeian, S.,Paquet-Labelle, A.,Beaudry, S.(2020).Who to trust on social media: How opinion leaders and seekers avoid disinformation and echo chambers.Social Media+ Society,6(2),2056305120913993.
  26. Ecker, U. K.,Lewandowsky, S.,Cook, J.,Schmid, P.,Fazio, L. K.,Brashier, N.,Amazeen, M. A.(2022).The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction.Nature Reviews Psychology,1(1),13-29.
  27. Erickson, B.(2003).Social networks: The value of variety.Contexts,2(1),25-31.
  28. Eveland, W. P.(2001).The cognitive mediation model of learning from the news: Evidence from nonelection, off-year election, and presidential election contexts.Communication Research,28(5),571-601.
  29. Eysenbach, G.,Powell, J.,Kuss, O.,Sa, E.-R.(2002).Empirical studies assessing The quality of health information for consumers on the world wide web: a systematic review.Journal of the American Medical Association,287(20),2691-2700.
  30. Ferlander, S.(2007).The importance of different forms of social capital for health.Acta Sociologica,50(2),115-128.
  31. Flanagin, A. J.,Metzger, M. J.(2000).Perceptions of internet information credibility.Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,77(3),515-540.
  32. Flynn, L. R.,Goldsmith, R. E.,Eastman, J. K.(1996).Opinion leaders and opinion seekers: Two new measurement scales.Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science,24,137-147.
  33. Fornell, C.,Larcker, D. F.(1981).Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error.Journal of Marketing Research,18(1),39-50.
  34. Freiling, I.,Krause, N. M.,Scheufele, D. A.,Brossard, D.(2023).Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: The role of anxiety during COVID-19.New Media & Society,25(1),141-162.
  35. Gil de Zúñiga, H.,Jung, N.,Valenzuela, S.(2012).Social media use for news and individuals’ social capital, civic engagement and political participation.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,17(3),319-336.
  36. Gilbert, K. L.,Quinn, S. C.,Goodman, R. M.,Butler, J.,Wallace, J.(2013).A meta-analysis of social capital and health: a case for needed research.Journal of Health Psychology,18(11),1385-1399.
  37. Gramlich, J. (2021, June 1). 10 facts about Americans and Facebook. Retrieved February 10, 2023 from https:// www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/06/01/facts-about-americans-and-facebook/
  38. Granovetter, M. S.(1973).The strength of weak ties.American Journal of Sociology,78(6),1360-1380.
  39. Grinberg, N.,Joseph, K.,Friedland, L.,Swire-Thompson, B.,Lazer, D.(2019).Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.Science,363(6425),374-378.
  40. Guo, J.,Chen, H. T.(2022).How does multi-platform social media use lead to biased news engagement? Examining the role of counter-attitudinal incidental exposure, cognitive elaboration, and network homogeneity.Social Media + Society,8(4),129140.
  41. Hair, J. F.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.(2006).Multivariate Data Analysis.New Jersey:Prentice Hall.
  42. Hargittai, E.(2005).Survey measures of web-oriented digital literacy.Social Science Computer Review,23(3),371-379.
  43. Harrison, J. A.,Mullen, P. D.,Green, L. W.(1992).A meta-analysis of studies of The health belief model with adults.Health Education Research,7(1),107-116.
  44. Hayes, A. F.(2018).Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach.New York, NY:Guilford Publications.
  45. Ho, S. S.,Chuah, A. S.(2022).Thinking, not talking, predicts knowledge level: Effects of media attention and reflective integration on public knowledge of nuclear energy.Public Understanding of Science,31(5),572-589.
  46. Hooper, V. A.(2018).Fake news and social media: The role of the receiver.Proceedings of the 5th European Conference on Social Media,Ireland:
  47. Hu, L. t.,Bentler, P. M.(1999).Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,6(1),1-55.
  48. Kenski, K.,Stroud, N. J.(2006).Connections between Internet use and political efficacy, knowledge, and participation.Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media,50(2),173-192.
  49. Kim, H.,Kim, Y.,Lee, D.(2020).Understanding the role of social media in political participation: Integrating political knowledge and bridging social capital from The social cognitive approach.International Journal of Communication,14,22.
  50. Kim, Y.-C.,Lim, J. Y.,Park, K.(2015).Effects of health literacy and social capital on health information behavior.Journal of Health Communication,20(9),1084-1094.
  51. Kobellarz, J. K.,Brocic, M.,Graeml, A. R.,Silver, D.,Silva, T. H.(2022).Reaching The bubble may not be enough: news media role in online political polarization.Epj Data Science,11(1),47.
  52. Lazer, D. M. J.,Baum, M. A.,Benkler, Y.,Berinsky, A. J.,Greenhill, K. M.,Menczer, F.,Metzger, M. J.,Nyhan, B.,Pennycook, G.,Rothschild, D.,Schudson, M.,Sloman, S. A.,Sunstein, C. R.,Thorson, E. A.,Watts, D. J.,Zittrain, J. L.(2018).The science of fake news.Science,359(6380),1094-1096.
  53. Le, B.,Lawrie, G. A.,Wang, J. T.(2022).Student self-perception on digital literacy in STEM blended learning environments.Journal of Science Education and Technology,31(3),303-321.
  54. Lewandowsky, S.,van der Linden, S.(2021).Countering misinformation and fake news through inoculation and prebunking.European Review of Social Psychology,32(2),348-384.
  55. Lin, L.-C.,Huang, P.-H.,Weng, L.-J.(2017).Selecting path models in SEM: A comparison of model selection criteria.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,24(6),855-869.
  56. MacLeod, C.,Campbell, L.(1992).Memory accessibility and probability judgments: an experimental evaluation of the availability heuristic.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,63(6),890-902.
  57. Maddux, J. E.,Rogers, R. W.(1983).Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,19(5),469-479.
  58. McGrew, S.(2020).Learning to evaluate: An intervention in civic online reasoning.Computers & Education,145,103711.
  59. McGrew, S.,Breakstone, J.,Ortega, T.,Smith, M.,Wineburg, S.(2018).Can students evaluate online sources? Learning from assessments of civic online reasoning.Theory & Research in Social Education,46(2),165-193.
  60. McGrew, S.,Ortega, T.,Breakstone, J.,Wineburg, S.(2017).The challenge that’s bigger than fake news: Civic reasoning in a social media environment.American Educator,41(3),4-9.
  61. McKernan, B.,Rossini, P.,Stromer-Galley, J.(2023).Echo chambers, cognitive thinking styles, and mistrust? Examining the roles information sources and information processing play in conspiracist ideation.International Journal of Communication,17,1102-1125.
  62. McNeill, L. H.,Kreuter, M. W.,Subramanian, S. V.(2006).Social environment and physical activity: A review of concepts and evidence.Social Science & Medicine (1982),63(4),1011-1022.
  63. Metzger, M. J.(2007).Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,58(13),2078-2091.
  64. Metzger, M. J.,Flanagin, A. J.(2013).Credibility and trust of information in online environments: The use of cognitive heuristics.Journal of Pragmatics,59,210-220.
  65. Mitchell, A., Gottfried, J., Stocking, G., Walker, M., & Fedeli, S. (2019). Many Americans say made-up news is a critical problem that needs to be fixed. Retrieved January 30 from https://www.journalism.org/2019/06/05/many-americans-say-made-up-news-is-a-critical-problem-that-needs-to-be-fixed/
  66. Morahan-Martin, J.,Anderson, C. D.(2000).Information and misinformation online: Recommendations for facilitating accurate mental health information retrieval and evaluation.CyberPsychology & Behavior,3(5),731-746.
  67. Ng, H. (2018). Most people say they can spot fake news but falter when tested: Survey. Retrieved December 27 from https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/most-people-say-they-can-spot-fake-news-but-falter-when-tested-survey
  68. Pariser, E.(2011).The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you.Longdon:Penguin Press.
  69. Pennycook, G.,Cannon, T. D.,Rand, D. G.(2018).Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news.Journal of Experimental Psychology: general
  70. Pennycook, G.,Epstein, Z.,Mosleh, M.,Arechar, A. A.,Eckles, D.,Rand, D. G.(2021).Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online.Nature,592(7855),590-595.
  71. Pennycook, G.,Rand, D. G.(2021).The psychology of fake news.Trends in Cognitive Sciences,25(5),388-402.
  72. Pereira, A.,Harris, E.,Van Bavel, J. J.(2023).Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news.Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,26(1),24-47.
  73. Pundir, V.,Devi, E. B.,Nath, V.(2021).Arresting fake news sharing on social media: A theory of planned behavior approach.Management Research Review
  74. Putnam, R. D.(2000).Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community.Simon and Schuster.
  75. Reicher, S.,Haslam, S. A.,Hopkins, N.(2005).Social identity and the dynamics of leadership: Leaders and followers as collaborative agents in the transformation of social reality.The Leadership Quarterly,16(4),547-568.
  76. Rhodes, S. C.(2022).Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and fake news: how social media conditions individuals to be less critical of political misinformation.Political Communication,39(1),1-22.
  77. Rosenbaum, P. R.(2002).Observational studies.New York:Springer.
  78. Rosenbaum, P. R.,Rubin, D. B.(1983).The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects.Biometrika,70(1),41-55.
  79. Scheufele, D. A.,Hardy, B. W.,Brossard, D.,Waismel-Manor, I. S.,Nisbet, E.(2006).Democracy based on difference: Examining the links between structural heterogeneity, heterogeneity of discussion networks, and democratic citizenship.Journal of Communication,56(4),728-753.
  80. Silverman, C. (2016). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. Retrieved Novermber 1 from https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook
  81. Stanford History Education Group. (2016). Evaluating information: The cornerstone of civic online reasoning (executive summary). Retrieved December 15 from https://sheg.stanford.edu/upload/V3LessonPlans/Executive%20Summary%2011.21.16.pdf
  82. Tandoc, E. C.,Lim, Z. W.,Ling, R.(2018).Defining "fake news" A typology of scholarly definitions.Digital Journalism,6(2),137-153.
  83. Theil, S.(2019).The online harms white paper: Comparing the UK and German approaches to regulation.Journal of Media Law,11(1),41-51.
  84. Traberg, C. S.,van der Linden, S.(2022).Birds of a feather are persuaded together: Perceived source credibility mediates the effect of political bias on misinformation susceptibility.Personality and Individual Differences,185,111269.
  85. Turcotte, J.,York, C.,Irving, J.,Scholl, R. M.,Pingree, R. J.(2015).News recommendations from social media opinion leaders: Effects on media trust and information seeking.Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication,20(5),520-535.
  86. van der Linden, S.(2022).Misinformation: susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public.Nature Medicine,28(3),460-467.
  87. Viswanath, K.(2008).Social capital and health communications.Social Capital and Health,New York, NY:
  88. World Economic Forum. (2018, March 14). Fake News Poses a Threat to Democracies across Latin America and Worldwide. Retrieved February 26 from https://www.weforum.org/press/2018/03/fake-news-poses-a-threat-to-democracies-across-latin-america-and-worldwide/
  89. Wu, Y.(2023).Predicting fact-checking health information before sharing among people with different levels of altruism: Based on the Influence of Presumed Media Influence.Psychology Research and Behavior Management,1495-1508.
  90. 台灣政經傳播研究中心（2018）。『台灣政經傳播研究』多年期研究規劃：2018年民眾定群追蹤面訪調查資料。取自 https://tigcr.nccu.edu.tw/tw/survey/1-pps2018?type=0
  91. 吳萬益,林清河(2002).企業研究方法.台北:華泰文化.
  92. 黃育仁（2019）。喝溫水可殺喉嚨病毒？衛福部澄清：不實謠言。取自 https://news.cts.com.tw/cts/life/201912/201912091983693.html。
  93. 臺灣事實查核中心（2019）。內容農場指出，「日本政府承認：112 萬噸的核廢水除了排入太平洋之外『別無選擇』」？取自 https://tfc-taiwan.org.tw/articles/919
print cancel