Media literacy tips promoting reliable news improve discernment and enhance trust in traditional media.

Media literacy tips typically encourage people to be skeptical of the news despite the small prevalence of false news in Western democracies. Would such tips be effective if they promoted trust in true news instead? A pre-registered experiment (N = 3919, US) showed that Skepticism-enhancing tips, Trust-inducing tips, and a mix of both tips, increased participants' sharing and accuracy discernment. The Trust-inducing tips boosted true news sharing and acceptance, the Skepticism-enhancing tips hindered false news sharing and acceptance, while the Mixed tips did both. Yet, the effects of the tips were more alike than different, with very similar effect sizes across conditions for true and false news. We experimentally manipulated the proportion of true and false news participants were exposed to. The Trust and Skepticism tips were most effective when participants were exposed to equal proportions of true and false news, while the Mixed tips were most effective when exposed to 75% of true news - the most realistic proportion. Moreover, the Trust-inducing tips increased trust in traditional media. Overall, we show that to be most effective, media literacy tips should aim both to foster skepticism towards false news and to promote trust in true news.

Prominent misinformation interventions reduce misperceptions but increase scepticism.

Current interventions to combat misinformation, including fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation, may have unintended consequences for democracy. We propose that these interventions may increase scepticism towards all information, including accurate information. Across three online survey experiments in three diverse countries (the United States, Poland and Hong Kong; total n = 6,127), we tested the negative spillover effects of existing strategies and compared them with three alternative interventions against misinformation. We examined how exposure to fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation affects individuals' perception of both factual and false information, as well as their trust in key democratic institutions. Our results show that while all interventions successfully reduce belief in false information, they also negatively impact the credibility of factual information. This highlights the need for further improved strategies that minimize the harms and maximize the benefits of interventions against misinformation.

Tokenization of social media engagements increases the sharing of false (and other) news but penalization moderates it.

Some major social media companies are announcing plans to tokenize user engagements, derived from blockchain-based decentralized social media. This would bring financial and reputational incentives for engagement, which might lead users to post more objectionable content. Previous research showed that financial or reputational incentives for accuracy decrease the willingness to share misinformation. However, it is unclear to what extent such outcome would change if engagements instead of accuracy were incentivized, which is a more realistic scenario. To address this question, we conducted a survey experiment to examine the effects of hypothetical token incentives. We find that a simple nudge about the possibility of earning token-based points for the achieved user engagements increases the willingness to share different kinds of news, including misinformation. The presence of penalties for objectionable posts diminishes the positive effect of tokenization rewards on misinformation sharing, but it does not eliminate it. These results have policy implications for content moderation practices if platforms embrace decentralization and engagement tokenization.