What are data voids and how do they affect the worldview?
According to a new study published in the journal Nature, using search engines to test conspiracy theories increases the likelihood that a person will believe them.
Scientists pay attention to such a phenomenon as "data voids". Often the problem is a lack of high-quality information that could refute misleading headlines. For example, when a person sees an article on the Internet about "artificial hunger" during the Covid-19 pandemic and searches for additional information by keywords, they are likely to come across materials that will only confirm their biases.
The researchers decided to find out how people check the latest news that professional fact checkers like Snopes or PolitiFact haven't had time to verify yet.
In one experiment, about 3,000 people across the United States evaluated the validity of news articles published over a 48-hour period on topics like Covid-19 vaccines, the impeachment of Trump, and climate change. Half of the participants were allowed to use search engines.
All articles were pre-checked and marked by professionals as "true", "false" or"impossible to determine".
People who had access to the Internet were 19% more likely to make mistakes compared to those who drew conclusions on their own.
According to scientists, this effect occurs due to the low quality of information provided by search engines like Google. First, the network often lacks reliable data on the topic. Second, as Zev Sanderson, a co-author of the study, noted, people often search for information themselves using inefficient methods.
77% of subjects who copied the title of a false article or even its URL received misinformation in the first results. For example, a search for "engineered famine" yielded false results more than half the time.
According to Kevin Aslett, another project manager, digital literacy training programs should not just recommend searching for information on the Internet. Instead, you should give users specific advice on how to perform your search as efficiently as possible. For example, pay attention not only to the content of the materials found, but also to their sources.
A Google spokesperson said that the lack of quality information on specific topics is a known problem for search engines. But they're already working on it.
The About This Result function provides more contextual information about the page found. In addition, Google issues warnings to users if the situation is constantly changing or there is little verified information about it.
Several independent studies confirm that Google produces significantly better results in the top, with less malicious content, than other search engines.
According to information technology expert Chirag Shah, IT is up to IT companies like Google to develop tools that help users distinguish truth from fiction.
"However, it is not the job of companies or governments to fully control or censor content. Filtering absolutely everything is not only technically impossible, but also immoral," he adds.
According to a new study published in the journal Nature, using search engines to test conspiracy theories increases the likelihood that a person will believe them.
Scientists pay attention to such a phenomenon as "data voids". Often the problem is a lack of high-quality information that could refute misleading headlines. For example, when a person sees an article on the Internet about "artificial hunger" during the Covid-19 pandemic and searches for additional information by keywords, they are likely to come across materials that will only confirm their biases.
The researchers decided to find out how people check the latest news that professional fact checkers like Snopes or PolitiFact haven't had time to verify yet.
In one experiment, about 3,000 people across the United States evaluated the validity of news articles published over a 48-hour period on topics like Covid-19 vaccines, the impeachment of Trump, and climate change. Half of the participants were allowed to use search engines.
All articles were pre-checked and marked by professionals as "true", "false" or"impossible to determine".
People who had access to the Internet were 19% more likely to make mistakes compared to those who drew conclusions on their own.
According to scientists, this effect occurs due to the low quality of information provided by search engines like Google. First, the network often lacks reliable data on the topic. Second, as Zev Sanderson, a co-author of the study, noted, people often search for information themselves using inefficient methods.
77% of subjects who copied the title of a false article or even its URL received misinformation in the first results. For example, a search for "engineered famine" yielded false results more than half the time.
According to Kevin Aslett, another project manager, digital literacy training programs should not just recommend searching for information on the Internet. Instead, you should give users specific advice on how to perform your search as efficiently as possible. For example, pay attention not only to the content of the materials found, but also to their sources.
A Google spokesperson said that the lack of quality information on specific topics is a known problem for search engines. But they're already working on it.
The About This Result function provides more contextual information about the page found. In addition, Google issues warnings to users if the situation is constantly changing or there is little verified information about it.
Several independent studies confirm that Google produces significantly better results in the top, with less malicious content, than other search engines.
According to information technology expert Chirag Shah, IT is up to IT companies like Google to develop tools that help users distinguish truth from fiction.
"However, it is not the job of companies or governments to fully control or censor content. Filtering absolutely everything is not only technically impossible, but also immoral," he adds.
