These results raise important insights on how we can encourage everyday users to speak up against misinformation—and how some well-meaning messages might not always work as intended.
Interestingly, adding a cue-to-action sometimes backfired—especially among students.
🔍 Key findings:
Problem-recognition messages highlighting the problem of misinformation from authoritative sources like the CDC significantly increased correction intentions in both samples.
Problem-recognition messages from a layperson also helped—but only among college students.
This study tests what motivates people to correct misinformation on social media. Using STOPS and HBM, two survey experiments (college students and adults) examined how problem-recognition messages and CTAs affect correction behaviors around raw milk misinformation.
🚨 New Publication Alert 🚨
Excited to share that my latest solo-authored article has been published:
Read the full article here: www.emerald.com/insight/cont...
See the comments for details.
Amazing, congratulations!
From MN: Turkeys in the snow. Apparently, they enjoy it and do not feel cold ❄️ !
Also many thanks to the guest editors, Dr. Jelle Mast and @mtemmerm.bsky.social, as well as the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and timely feedback.
New publication: Our analysis suggests in health journalists’ COVID-19 tweets, first-person pronouns, moral appeals, and negative emotions increase engagement, while politicized language reduces it.
Huge thanks to my amazing advisor @ekvraga.bsky.social and my fantastic collaborator Yuming Fang.
