Future of disinformation studies: emerging research fields

Abstract

This article examines research trends on disinformation. First, it explores the relationship between disinformation and digital news media, highlighting the negative impact of disinformation on citizens’ trust in the news. Recent research on disinformation is classified into several areas, including typological studies, research on fact-checking, disinformation on digital platforms, and studies on media literacy. Next, the article identifies several emerging fields for research, such as studies on disinformation narratives, information manipulation and international interference, artificial intelligence generated disinformation, cross-platform disinformation, and thematic and multidisciplinary studies. Based on this analysis, the article highlights the need to continue investigating and combatting disinformation, as it is a persistent and growing problem in democratic societies.

Research on Disinformation in Academic Studies: Perspectives through a Bibliometric Analysis

“…In this way, the present work aims to show an accurate picture of the state of scientific research on the global phenomenon of disinformation. In order to achieve this objective, a series of partial goals were set: (1) to determine the area of knowledge in which there are the greatest number of publications on this subject; (2) to verify research of scientific activity in the different disciplines; (3) to study the origin of the publications; and (4) to carry out a systematic analysis of the 50 most cited articles on disinformation. This is, therefore, a descriptive type of research that will be performed with a quantitative approach through this academic discipline.…”

“…In the last decade, disinformation has emerged as a phenomenon of remarkable complexity, standing out especially for its constitutive plurivocity. Not only does it manifest itself as an (un)informative phenomenon with diverse strategies, but it is also presented in multiple forms in the numerous academic approaches which have been published in the last decade [1][2][3]. This conceptual variety reflects the epistemological difficulty in its definition, encompassing a wide range of terms such as disinformation, misinformation, fake news, hoax, deepfakes and astroturfing, amongst others [4][5][6], all of which refer to different realities within the same phenomenon that is normally termed generically, in turn, as disinformation.…”

“…These include not only governmental actions and international organizations to combat disinformation [10][11][12], but also other academic proposals which have made effective progress in identifying the phenomenon. Among them, Salaverría and Cardoso [2] propose a study on the future of disinformation research that emphasizes the four most studied aspects: typological studies of disinformation; fact-checking; disinformation on digital platforms; and media literacy. In addition, their proposal goes a step further and points out, within these emerging fields, what studies are addressing the topic and what they should pay attention to in the future.…”

Corporate policies to protect against disinformation for young audiences: the case of TikTok

“…This article falls within the qualitative typology of studies on disinformation in digital platforms initiated by Salaverría and Cardoso (2023), taking into account one of the difficulties that these authors put forward, that being access to the data of these platforms and their lack of transparency. Like the research conducted by Estrada-Cuzcano et al (2020) this article was designed through a qualitative and interpretative approach and was framed in a descriptive documentary research, which determined the selection procedure, access and registration of the documentary sample.…”

“…To meet this objective, a systematic literature review was conducted. Prior studies on misinformation by other authors were consulted, such as those by Blanco-Alonso et al (2021); Guallar et al (2020); Salaverría et al (2020); Gomes-Gonçalves et al (2023), Hopp and Kazmi (2023); Rúas-Araújo and Panigua-Rojano (2023), and Salaverría and Cardoso (2023). Other fundamental sources of information consulted were the documents issued by the European Commission, the official journals of the European Union and the policy documents published by TikTok.…”