A SURVEY OF HOW POLITICAL MISINFORMATION GUIDED WRONGLY INTO PEOPLE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55829/ijmpr.v2i4.181Keywords:
Spearman rank correlation, paired t-test, multiple regression, one-way ANOVA, high quality information, social media, literacy skills, false news, democracy, misinformation, public opinion formation, financial gain, corruption, coordination maintenanceAbstract
This study examined the relationship between the quality of information, literacy skills, social media use, and belief in false news. The findings suggest that high-quality information and literacy skills are associated with a lower belief in false news. The study also found that social media use is not a significant predictor of belief in false news. The results suggest that misinformation can be a threat to democracy and that factors such as the quality of information and literacy skills are important for countering it. The study did not find a significant difference in coordination maintenance between groups. The factors affecting the difficulty in tackling false news were not explored in this study. The study did not assess the level of corruption on a topic or discuss the reasons for creating fake news. Overall, the study highlights the importance of high-quality information and literacy skills in countering political misinformation.
The survey investigates the relationship between various factors and the spread of political misinformation. The study analyses 199 observations using several statistical methods, including Spearman rank correlation, paired t-test, multiple regression, and one-way ANOVA. The results suggest that there is a positive but weak correlation between high- quality information and the threat to democracy. The study also reveals that individuals with higher literacy skills and those who consume high-quality information may be less likely to believe false news. The findings further suggest that social media platforms may contribute to the difficulty in judging the quality of information. Additionally, the study reveals that corruption level varies depending on the topic. The study provides insights into the mechanics of political misinformation and the factors that contribute to its spread.
References
Lippmann, W. (1922). Public Opinion. New York: Harcourt Brace.
Graber, D. A. (1984). Processing the News: How People Tame the Information Tide. New York: Longman.
Tsfati, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2003). News Influence on Our Pictures of the World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M. (2011). Ideological Segregation Online and Offline. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126(4), 1799–1839.
Dubois, E., & Blank, G. (2018). The Echo Chamber is Overstated: The Moderating Effect of Political Interest and Diverse Media. Information, Communication & Society, 21(5), 729–745.
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236.
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019). Who Falls for Fake News? The Roles of Bullshit Receptivity, Overclaiming, Familiarity, and Analytic Thinking. Journal of Personality, 88(2), 185–200.
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019). The Fake News Game: Actively Inoculating Against the Risk of Misinformation. Journal of Risk Research, 22(5), 570– 580.
Tripathi, S., & Somaiya, J. (2021). A Study on Social Media Addiction Among Youth of Gujarat Using Factor Analysis. Towards Excellence, 13(3), 796-811.
Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2020). Exposure to Untrustworthy Websites in the 2016 US Election. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 472–480.
Kahan, D. M. (2017). Misconceptions, Misinformation, and the Logic of Identity- Protective Cognition. SSRN Electronic Journal.
