Sherlock-wannabes or when the audience fact-checks. How ideology, education, and alternative media use explain fact-checking behaviors

Author:

Saldaña MagdalenaORCID,Santos MarceloORCID

Abstract

When confronted with suspicious information, the most common advice is to rely on trusted, well-known news media outlets to verify it. However, in a high-choice, fragmented media ecosystem, news readers might easily find a source that confirms what they previously thought about an issue, or debunks reports that challenge their values and beliefs. As such, alternative news outlets might be a feasible venue for citizens to confront cross-cutting information. At the same time, avoiding contrary information or actively seeking different points of view depends on personal characteristics, such as ideology or education. Drawing upon the belief gap hypothesis, this study observes how alternative news media use, together with people’s education and political ideology, affect citizens’ fact-checking behaviors when encountering challenging information. Results from a two-wave panel study conducted in Chile suggest that ideology plays a role only for the highly educated, who tend to fact-check the most when they are closer to the left side of the political spectrum. 

Publisher

Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM)

Subject

Communication,Cultural Studies

Reference51 articles.

1. Arriagada, A. & Navia, P. (2013). Medios y audiencias, democracia y ciudadanos. In A. Arriagada, & P. Navia (Eds.) Intermedios: Medios de comunicación y democracia en Chile. Ediciones Universidad Diego Portales.

2. Bachmann, I., Valenzuela, S., & Ortega, C. (2022, January 18). #Real: El fact-checking en Chile reduce la desinformación. Fast Check CL. https://tinyurl.com/ybx7x7zp

3. Bakir, V. & McStay, A. (2018). Fake News and The Economy of Emotions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 154-175.

4. Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., & Bonneau, R. (2015). Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber? Psychological Science, 26(10), 1531-1542.

5. Chia, S. C., Lu, F., & Gunther, A. C. (2022). Who Fact-checks and Does It Matter? Examining the Antecedents and Consequences of Audience Fact-Checking Behaviour in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612221142439

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3