國立虎尾科技大學 |

False News : = A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,手稿 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	False News :/
其他題名:	A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice.
作者:	Khandoozi, Seyedali.
面頁冊數:	1 online resource (315 pages)
附註:	Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06, Section: B.
Contained By:	Dissertations Abstracts International84-06B.
標題:	Behavior. -
電子資源:	click for full text (PQDT)
ISBN:	9798358424630

False News : = A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice.
Khandoozi, Seyedali.

False News :A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice. - 1 online resource (315 pages)

Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06, Section: B.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Queen's University (Canada), 2022.

Includes bibliographical references

Across three conceptual and empirical studies, we respond to urgent calls from all corners of society to address the wicked and universal problem of false messages circulating on the Internet, better known as "fake news". In the first paper, we problematize the use of the term "fake news", highlighting issues around its different meanings in prior academic research, its current meaning in the vernacular, and its adequacy to cover the entirety of the phenomena of online falsehoods. Building on existing attempts at addressing the conceptualization problem, we offer our own solution based on the literature on the ontology of digital objects, proposing the concept of "false messages", of which "false news" is a subset. We also situate this new concept in its broader technical and social context. In the second paper, we shift our attention to mitigating the problem of false news and compare the effects of two algorithmic advisors on individuals' judgment about news facticity. A large number of algorithms are being developed to identify false news based on the content of news articles (content-based algorithms) or social reaction to news articles (social-based algorithms), which we argue, can act as algorithmic advisors to humans about news facticity. Based on the theory of technology dominance (TTD), Judge-Advisor System (JAS) studies, and computers are social actors (CASA) paradigm, we hypothesize and find some empirical evidence that content-based and social-based algorithmic advisors differ in their ability to influence individuals' judgments about news facticity. In the final paper, we compare two algorithmic advisors that differ in their source of training data, with one advisor trained using data from a fact-checker with liberal political attitudes and the other trained with data from a fact-checker with conservative political attitudes. Extending the TTD by linking it to similarity-attraction studies, we find different patterns of advice taking from the two algorithmic advisors among US-based Democrats, Republicans, and independents, with Democrats utilizing advice from the algorithmic advisor with liberal training data and Republicans not utilizing advice from either algorithmic advisor, while independents utilized advice from the liberal algorithmic advisor with more nuances compared to the Democrats.

Electronic reproduction.
Ann Arbor, Mich. :
ProQuest,
2024

Mode of access: World Wide Web

ISBN: 9798358424630Subjects--Topical Terms:

582559
Behavior.
Index Terms--Genre/Form:

554714
Electronic books.

False News : = A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice.
LDR:03686ntm a22003857 4500 001 1142538
005 20240422070857.5
006 m o d
007 cr mn ---uuuuu
008 250605s2022 xx obm 000 0 eng d
020 $a 9798358424630
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI30168774
035 $a (MiAaPQ)QueensUCan_197430454
035 $a AAI30168774
040 $a MiAaPQ $b eng $c MiAaPQ $d NTU
100 1 $a Khandoozi, Seyedali. $3 1466902
245 1 0 $a False News : $b A Digital Conceptualization and Potential Mitigation Using Algorithmic Advice.
264 0 $c 2022
300 $a 1 online resource (315 pages)
336 $a text $b txt $2 rdacontent
337 $a computer $b c $2 rdamedia
338 $a online resource $b cr $2 rdacarrier
500 $a Source: Dissertations Abstracts International, Volume: 84-06, Section: B.
500 $a Advisor: Brohman, Kathryn.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--Queen's University (Canada), 2022.
504 $a Includes bibliographical references
520 $a Across three conceptual and empirical studies, we respond to urgent calls from all corners of society to address the wicked and universal problem of false messages circulating on the Internet, better known as "fake news". In the first paper, we problematize the use of the term "fake news", highlighting issues around its different meanings in prior academic research, its current meaning in the vernacular, and its adequacy to cover the entirety of the phenomena of online falsehoods. Building on existing attempts at addressing the conceptualization problem, we offer our own solution based on the literature on the ontology of digital objects, proposing the concept of "false messages", of which "false news" is a subset. We also situate this new concept in its broader technical and social context. In the second paper, we shift our attention to mitigating the problem of false news and compare the effects of two algorithmic advisors on individuals' judgment about news facticity. A large number of algorithms are being developed to identify false news based on the content of news articles (content-based algorithms) or social reaction to news articles (social-based algorithms), which we argue, can act as algorithmic advisors to humans about news facticity. Based on the theory of technology dominance (TTD), Judge-Advisor System (JAS) studies, and computers are social actors (CASA) paradigm, we hypothesize and find some empirical evidence that content-based and social-based algorithmic advisors differ in their ability to influence individuals' judgments about news facticity. In the final paper, we compare two algorithmic advisors that differ in their source of training data, with one advisor trained using data from a fact-checker with liberal political attitudes and the other trained with data from a fact-checker with conservative political attitudes. Extending the TTD by linking it to similarity-attraction studies, we find different patterns of advice taking from the two algorithmic advisors among US-based Democrats, Republicans, and independents, with Democrats utilizing advice from the algorithmic advisor with liberal training data and Republicans not utilizing advice from either algorithmic advisor, while independents utilized advice from the liberal algorithmic advisor with more nuances compared to the Democrats.
533 $a Electronic reproduction. $b Ann Arbor, Mich. : $c ProQuest, $d 2024
538 $a Mode of access: World Wide Web
650 4 $a Behavior. $3 582559
650 4 $a Computer science. $3 573171
650 4 $a Political parties. $3 555340
650 4 $a User generated content. $3 1466903
650 4 $a Political science. $3 558774
650 4 $a Censorship. $3 802486
650 4 $a Presidential elections. $3 1466904
650 4 $a Information technology. $3 559429
650 4 $a Mass communications. $3 1335238
650 4 $a Web studies. $3 1148502
655 7 $a Electronic books. $2 local $3 554714
690 $a 0984
690 $a 0800
690 $a 0615
690 $a 0489
690 $a 0646
690 $a 0708
710 2 $a ProQuest Information and Learning Co. $3 1178819
710 2 $a Queen's University (Canada). $3 1148613
773 0 $t Dissertations Abstracts International $g 84-06B.
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=30168774 $z click for full text (PQDT)