Social media comments can act as ‘quick warning signals’ against misinformation, study shows

Comments from ordinary users on social media platforms can be a force for good, helping others identify misinformation and navigate what is accurate, new research suggests.

However, these same comments can also be misleading when they are inaccurate, making it difficult for people to judge what can be trusted.

A new book shows that digital media literacy is not just about knowing fact from fiction, but also about assessing the reliability of user comments.

In the book “The Power of the Crowd”, Professor Florian Stöckel, from the University of Exeter, and his co-authors discover this double-edged model. The book also shows how difficult it is for people to distinguish accurate information from inaccurate information.

In a large-scale study of more than 10,000 participants in Germany, the United Kingdom and Italy, researchers examined individuals’ ability to categorize true and false news in social media posts. Participants saw a set of false and true informational messages taken from real online content.

The study covered forty-seven different topics, including health, technology, and politics, all taken from real online content. The fake news came from documents flagged by fact-checking organizations in each country. The results highlight how difficult it is for people to identify fake news: Most fake news was considered accurate by at least three in ten people, and some was considered true by about half of those surveyed.

The study finds that everyday user comments can serve as signals to others, indicating what is true and what is not. When accurate, these comments help users spot misinformation. But when they are misleading, they can undermine confidence in correct information.

Professor Stöckel said: “We found that user comments work as early warning signals. People treat them rather superficially instead of engaging in deeper reasoning. This makes them helpful when they are right, but also explains why inaccurate comments are so easily misleading.

Encouragingly, the study also shows that there is broad public support for correcting false content. Survey data from Germany, for example, shows that 73% of respondents prefer content to be corrected, even if it draws more attention to the original misinformation. This is promising for those considering getting involved in online debates: others will likely appreciate false content being flagged.

The book also offers practical advice on how to write effective corrections. People don’t need to write long comments; even short statements can be effective. What matters most is that those who issue corrections present the facts correctly. Before publishing a correction, it may be helpful to double-check, for example by visiting the website of a fact-checking organization.

Professor Stöckel said: “The potential of corrective comments is that they offer all users a way to improve the information environment on social media, even if the platforms do not take action. »

Research also shows that people are more likely to believe fake news when it matches their previous attitudes. The authors took this into account in their analyzes and nevertheless found modest but consistent effects of corrective feedback across countries.

The fieldwork was carried out in 2022 and 2023. It included articles on public health (COVID-19, vaccines, smoking), technology (the 5G mobile phone network), climate change and politics. Around 1,900 people in Britain, 2,400 in Italy and 2,200 in Germany took part in the initial study, and an additional 4,000 people in Germany took part in a follow-up survey.