Actively open-minded thinking is key to combating fake news: A multimethod study

Mirhoseini, Mahdi; Early, Spencer; Shamy, Nour El; Hassanein, Khaled

doi:10.1016/j.im.2023.103761

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…They also discover that people are more inclined to check the assessment details when the article content matched their pre-existing attitudes, regardless of icon valence. Mirhoseini et al (2023) through a laboratory experiment and online survey examines why individuals believe fake news and offers a solution. Behavioral and neurophysiological data suggest closedmindedness promotes fake news.…”

Section: Methodology Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fake news in business and management literature: a systematic review of definitions, theories, methods and implications

Farhoudinia,

Ozturkcan,

Kasap

2023

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis paper aims to conduct an interdisciplinary systematic literature review (SLR) of fake news research and to advance the socio-technical understanding of digital information practices and platforms in business and management studies.Design/methodology/approachThe paper applies a focused, SLR method to analyze articles on fake news in business and management journals from 2010 to 2020.FindingsThe paper analyzes the definition, theoretical frameworks, methods and research gaps of fake news in the business and management domains. It also identifies some promising research opportunities for future scholars.Practical implicationsThe paper offers practical implications for various stakeholders who are affected by or involved in fake news dissemination, such as brands, consumers and policymakers. It provides recommendations to cope with the challenges and risks of fake news.Social implicationsThe paper discusses the social consequences and future threats of fake news, especially in relation to social networking and social media. It calls for more awareness and responsibility from online communities to prevent and combat fake news.Originality/valueThe paper contributes to the literature on information management by showing the importance and consequences of fake news sharing for societies. It is among the frontier systematic reviews in the field that covers studies from different disciplines and focuses on business and management studies.

show abstract

Section: Methodology Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fake news in business and management literature: a systematic review of definitions, theories, methods and implications

Farhoudinia,

Ozturkcan,

Kasap

2023

AJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The classical reasoning account aligns with the dual-process theories of judgment, which posit that analytic thinking, as opposed to intuition, can often lead to sound judgment (Evans and Stanovich 2013). The second account is the motivated reasoning account (Kunda 1990), which proposes that people tend to use reasoning to justify their pre-existing beliefs and self-serving conclusions, driven by various motivations (Mirhoseini et al 2023). According to Pehlivanoglu et al (2022), the motivated reasoning account suggests that individuals are more inclined to apply analytical reasoning to issues that correspond to their pre-existing beliefs.…”

Section: Research Gapsmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…To that effect, researchers have proposed two primary accounts of susceptibility to fake news (Pehlivanoglu et al 2022). The first is the classical account of reasoning, which contends that people's vulnerability to fake news is due to a lack of analytical thinking (Tandoc 2019;Bago et al 2020;Mirhoseini et al 2023). This account proposes that the ability to identify fake news is predicted by analytical reasoning, irrespective of whether the news aligns with one's ideology (Pennycook and Rand 2019a).…”

Section: Research Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Affect on the Perception of Fake News on Social Media: A Systematic Review

Ali Adeeb,

Mirhoseini

2023

Social Sciences

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social media platforms, which are ripe with emotionally charged pieces of information, are vulnerable to the dissemination of vast amounts of misinformation. Little is known about the affective processing that underlies peoples’ belief in and dissemination of fake news on social media, with the research on fake news predominantly focusing on cognitive processing aspects. This study presents a systematic review of the impact of affective constructs on the perception of fake news on social media platforms. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in the SCOPUS and Web of Science databases to identify relevant articles on the topics of affect, misinformation, disinformation, and fake news. A total of 31 empirical articles were obtained and analyzed. Seven research themes and four research gaps emerged from this review. The findings of this review complement the existing literature on the cognitive mechanisms behind how people perceive fake news on social media. This can have implications for technology platforms, governments, and citizens interested in combating infodemics.

show abstract

“…Research into why people believe and share misinformation has seen a surge in recent years (Roozenbeek et al, 2023). Previous work has identified both individual-and societal-level factors that predict misinformation belief and sharing, including partisanship (Osmundsen et al, 2021), actively open-minded thinking (Mirhoseini et al, 2023;Roozenbeek, Maertens, et al, 2022), numeracy and analytical thinking (Mosleh et al, 2019;Pehlivanoglu et al, 2021), trust in institutions (Melki et al, 2021;Ognyanova et al, 2020), and affective polarization (Jenke, 2023).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Misleading But Not Fake: Measuring the Difference Between Manipulativeness Discernment and Veracity Discernment Using Psychometrically Validated Tests

Maertens,

Said,

Buder

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Misinformation continues to pose a substantial societal problem, but the measurement of misinformation susceptibility has often been done using non-validated tests. Furthermore, research shows that misleading content (implied misinformation) is much more common than outright false content (explicit misinformation). However, there is very little research on the predictors of belief in implied misinformation, and it is unknown if susceptibility to direct and implied misinformation are psychologically similar. To address these questions, we ran three preregistered studies (N 1 = 487, N 2 = 547, N 3 = 490) in which we developed and validated the 24-item and 12-item Manipulative Online Content Recognition Inventory (MOCRI), a test that measures a person’s ability to distinguish between misleading and neutral content. This test substantially outperforms other known predictors of misinformation susceptibility in terms of its predictive value for people’s ability to correctly identify many kinds of misleading content. We also show that susceptibility to misleading and false content are psychologically different from one another, although they are related. Finally, we show that people who score high on the MOCRI are much better than low MOCRI performers at discerning manipulative from non-manipulative statements (i.e., they have better “discernment”), but that this ability does not necessarily translate to better discernment in the quality of their sharing decisions, or their willingness to reply to manipulative vs. non-manipulative messages. Instead, people who are more resilient to being manipulated are lesslikely to share and respond to both manipulative and non-manipulative content.

show abstract

Actively open-minded thinking is key to combating fake news: A multimethod study

Cited by 5 publications

References 69 publications

Fake news in business and management literature: a systematic review of definitions, theories, methods and implications

Fake news in business and management literature: a systematic review of definitions, theories, methods and implications

The Impact of Affect on the Perception of Fake News on Social Media: A Systematic Review

Misleading But Not Fake: Measuring the Difference Between Manipulativeness Discernment and Veracity Discernment Using Psychometrically Validated Tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About