#24 Info / Desinfo #MediaLiteracy&Disinformation. 7th December 2023
Monthly bulletin on media literacy, disinformation and regulation from the Ukrainian editorial team
Hello!
Four years ago, in December, the COVID-19 virus was first detected in the Chinese city of Wuhan. Since then, a new wave of scientific disinformation has begun.
Misleading health information, dangerous hoaxes with false claims, conspiracy theories, and consumer fraud have created a new threat to society's life and health.
Today, we discuss scientific disinformation, its threats, and methods of combating scientific fakes. Remember to pay attention to the illustration by our own Roni Milovanova. She reflected on the topic and created this excellent illustration.
Scientific misinformation. Illustrator: Roni Milovanova
What is scientific misinformation?
First a little theory:
Scientific misinformation is publicly available information that is misleading or deceptive relative to the best available scientific evidence and that runs contrary to statements by actors or institutions who adhere to scientific principles.
Some types of misinformation present falsified claims that contradict the scientific consensus on specific topics and complicate public debate on policies related to these issues, and actors also sometimes use scientific misinformation to attack the integrity of scientific communities.
For more information on the definition of scientific misinformation, see the article by Brian Southwell, Jay Brennan, and others, "Defining and Measuring Scientific Misinformation."
Read here.
Links between scientific topics and journals according to users' clickstreams.
Source: PLOS ONE/www.openmindmag.org.
How does science feed the culture of misinformation?
In the modern age, science faces the growing challenge that any internet user can express an opinion with little regard for its authenticity. False information about vaccines and climate change is widely disseminated online and has spawned whole movements of anti-vaccinationists and fans of the theory of deniability.
But science itself also saturates the information space with unverified content, creating uncertainty and mistrust to the scientific community. For example, new research without scientific confirmation becomes the focus of public discourse.
In 2012, French biologist Eric Seralini published a study that showed tumor growth in rats fed genetically modified corn. His findings, as well as images of the affected rats actively disseminated by the media. Although the article was later retracted, it became the impetus for numerous protests against using GMOs. However, there is no scientific evidence linking the consumption of GM crops to cancer (Read more in article by Dr. Victor Oria).
In particular, when looking at the role of science in disinformation, it becomes apparent how it fuels the culture of disinformation. Scientific research can be distorted or misused, causing widespread misunderstanding. Social networks and media play a crucial role in spreading scientific fakes, using the Internet as an effective platform for the rapid spread of disinformation.
According to Joel Renstrom's article, scientific journals and scientists compete for clicks like regular publications. The most downloaded, read, and shared pieces get a high "impact factor" or Altmetric Attention Score. Research shows that people are likelier to read and share articles with short, positively worded, or emotionally charged headlines.
Read more here.
Memory Reboot: How the effects of misinformation alter our memories
Did you know that misinformation is dangerous to the present and actively affects the past?
Scientists have found that knowledge of new information can distort our previous perceptions by forming cognitive biases.
In this case, the misinformation effect manifests itself in memory impairment caused by unreliable information. Misleading facts and false publications penetrate and alter the memory of a past event.
"Memory is a reconstructive process and we are vulnerable to suggestion distorting our recollections, without our conscious awareness," said Dr Gillian Murphy of University College Cork.
One example of how misinformation affects people's memories is a study conducted during the 2018 referendum on legalizing abortion in Ireland.
At the time, volunteers were shown fabricated news stories. Afterward, almost half of them said they had previously remembered at least one of the fictionalized events.
Many did not question their false memories even after being told that the articles they had read might be fake.
Today, the remote consequences of using such manipulations in systemic disinformation campaigns can have highly damaging effects.
To avoid being influenced by this effect, it certainly pays to use quality sources of information. The researchers also note that people who tend to reflect and analyze are less susceptible to misinformation than those who meditate, examine arguments, and rely on formulaic and stereotypical thinking.
In Kendra Cherry's article, read more about why the misinformation effect occurs, potentially leading to the formation of false memories, and how to combat it.
Combating scientific misinformation is proving much more difficult
Researchers at the Annenberg School for Communication have found that attempts to debunk scientific misinformation often fail. While in other areas, such as politics, refuting untrue information gets results, it doesn't work with misinformation about science. People continue to believe misinformation even after it has been publicly debunked, the scientists show.
"We humans like to keep our rose-tinted glasses on, and we are resistant to debunking pseudoscience that feels good," says Albarracín, the Alexandra Heyman Nash University Professor at the University of Pennsylvania and director of the Science of Science Communication division of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.
About factors that make correcting misinformation about science more successful, read here.
Who are science communicators and how they are involved in spreading scientific misinformation
"Science communicators" are a broad category of people who write about scientific issues, including conspiracy theorists and science journalists. After analysing 5 million tweets, the researchers noted that communicators tend to selectively amplify some research and downplay others, creating evidence both for and against.
The study authors believe that "science communicators" are people who share their opinions on scientific issues without any scientific training or experience. This group is different from scientists who publish their work in scientific journals.
Read more about the findings of the study here.
And of course, we couldn't leave you without recommendations. Here is a list of three books that will help you better understand misinformation, especially scientific misinformation.
The Stickler’s Guide to Science in the Age of Misinformation: The Real Science Behind Hacky Headlines, Crappy Clickbait, and Suspect Sources by R. Philip Bouchard
This book unpacks the many misuses of daily terms, revealing how these popular concepts fall short of natural science. It is not a book that fuels you with facts from the science world, but it forces you to see everything from different angles.
Science and the Skeptic: Discerning Fact from Fiction by Marc Zimmer
The book promises to teach you how science is done, from the primary scientific method to the vetting process scientific papers must go through to become published.
A Survival Guide to the Misinformation Age: Scientific Habits of Mind by David J. Helfand
This book provides an inoculation against the misinformation epidemic by cultivating scientific habits of mind.
Editorial team: Kateryna Horska (Editor-in-chief), Anastasiia Kerpan (Head Editor), Angelina Merva, Daria Vakicheva, Oleksandr Homenko (Head of news), Roni Milovanova (Designer)