Testing Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News: A Combined Design of Quasi-Experiment and Group Discussions
2. Literature Review
2.1. Digital Literacy and Fake News
2.2. Fake News Identifying Processes
3. Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News in Other Studies
4. Materials and Methods
- Do Romanian children (10–11 years old, N = 33) and adolescents (18–19 years old, N = 21) perceive the hoax website Salvăm Jacalopul (Saving the jackalope) as reliable, as the Dutch school children did with Save The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus?
- What are the mechanisms underlying the fake news identifying process?
- This website presents an endangered animal. What country does it live in?
- According to the website, the jackalope is an endangered species. For what reason?
- If Greenpeace were to ask you to save this animal, would you support this by signing? YES, because […] NO, because […] (choose one).
- Were there parts of the website you did not understand? If so, please explain.
- If there are any other comments about this website you would like to make, please write them below.
6. Discussion and Conclusions
Conflicts of Interest
- Antena3.ro. Available online: https://bit.ly/39aeaI9 (accessed on 23 February 2019).
- Loos, E.; Ivan, L.; Leu, D. “Save the Pacific Northwest tree octopus”: A hoax revisited. Or: How vulnerable are school children to fake news? Inf. Learn. Sci. 2018, 119, 514–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pilgrim, J.; Vasinda, S.; Bledsoe, C.; Martinez, E. Critical Thinking Is Critical: Octopuses, Online Sources, and Reliability Reasoning. Read. Teach. 2019, 73, 85–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Leu, D.J.; Reinking, D.; Carter, A.; Castek, J.; Coiro, J.; Henry, L.A.; Zawilinski, L. Defining online reading comprehension: Using think aloud verbal protocols to refine a preliminary model of Internet reading comprehension processes. Presented at the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, USA, 2007; Available online: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dcbjhrtq_10djqrhz (accessed on 18 August 2020).
- Vosoughi, S.; Roy, D.; Aral, S. The spread of true and false news online. Science 2018, 359, 1146–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Domonoske, C. Students Have ‘Dismaying’ Inability to Tell Fake News from Real, Study Finds. Natl. Public Radio 2016. Available online: https://n.pr/3mvY3uB (accessed on 18 August 2020).
- Scholz-Crane, A. Evaluating the future: A preliminary study of the process of how undergraduate students evaluate Web sources. Ref. Serv. Rev. 1998, 26, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Malita, L.; Grosseck, G. Tackling Fake News in a Digital Literacy Curriculum. Int. Sci. Conf. eLearning Softw. Educ. 2018, 4, 343–350. [Google Scholar]
- Frunzaru, V.; Corbu, N. Students’ attitudes towards knowledge and the future of work. Kybernetes 2020, 49, 1987–2002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Prensky, M. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. In On the Horizon; MCB University Press: Bingley, UK, 2001; Volume 9, pp. 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Prensky, M. Listen to the natives. Educ. Leadersh. 2005, 63, 8–13. [Google Scholar]
- Alexander, B.; Adams Becker, S.; Cummins, M.; Giesinger, C.H. Digital Literacy in Higher Education, Part II: An NMC Horizon Project Strategic Brief; The New Media Consortium: Austin, TX, USA, 2017; pp. 1–37. [Google Scholar]
- Loos, E. Senior citizens: Digital immigrants in their own country? Observatorio (OBS*) 2012, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harding, T. Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants, Zur Institute. 2010. Available online: http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/enhanced/primers/digital_natives.html (accessed on 25 May 2019).
- Hargittai, E. Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation”. Sociol. Inq. 2010, 80, 92–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jones, C. A new generation of learners? The Net Generation and Digital Natives. Learn. Media Technol. 2010, 35, 365–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Margaryan, A.; Littlejohn, A. Are digital natives a myth or reality? University students’ use of digital technologies. Comput. Educ. 2011, 56, 429–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gallardo-Echenique, E.E.; Marqués-Molías, L.; Bullen, M.; Strijbos, J.W. Let’s talk about digital learners in the digital era. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2015, 16, 156–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Eshet-Alkalai, Y. Digital Literacy: A Conceptual Framework for Survival Skills in the Digital Era. J. Educ. Multimed. Hypermedia 2004, 13, 93–106. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, W. Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Comput. Educ. 2012, 59, 1065–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Martin, A. DigEuLit—A European Framework for Digital Literacy: A Progress Report. J. eLiteracy 2005, 2, 130–136. [Google Scholar]
- Eshet-Alkalai, Y.; Amichai-Hamburger, Y. Experiments in digital literacy. CyberPsychology Behav. 2004, 7, 421–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobbs, R. Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action. A White Paper on the Digital and Media Literacy Recommendations of the Knight Commission on the Information Needs of Communities in a Democracy; Aspen Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2010. [Google Scholar]
- Shu, K.; Sliva, A.; Wang, S.; Tang, J.; Liu, H. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. 2017, 19, 22–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allcott, H.; Gentzkow, M. Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. J. Econ. Perspect. 2017, 31, 211–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Tandoc, E.C., Jr.; Lim, Z.W.; Ling, R. Defining “fake news” A typology of scholarly definitions. Digit. J. 2018, 6, 137–153. [Google Scholar]
- Lazer, D.M.; Baum, M.A.; Benkler, Y.; Berinsky, A.J.; Greenhill, K.M.; Menczer, F.; Zittrain, J.L. The science of fake news. Science 2018, 359, 1094–1098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McGrew, S.; Ortega, T.; Breakstone, J.; Wineburg, S. The Challenge That’s Bigger than Fake News: Civic Reasoning in a Social Media Environment. Am. Educ. 2017, 41, 4. [Google Scholar]
- Waldrop, M.M. News Feature: The genuine problem of fake news. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 12631–12634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Pennycook, G.; Rand, D.G. Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. J. Personal. 2020, 88, 185–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mediafax.ro. Available online: https://bit.ly/319hKQf (accessed on 17 August 2020).
- McDougall, J.; Brites, M.J.; Couto, M.J.; Lucas, C. Digital literacy, fake news and education/Alfabetización digital, fake news y educación. Cult. Educ. 2019, 31, 203–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero-Rodriguez, L.M.; Contreras-Pulido, P.; Pérez-Rodríguez, M.A. Media competencies of university professors and students. Comparison of levels in Spain, Portugal, Brazil and Venezuela/Las competencias mediáticas de profesores y estudiantes universitarios. Comparación de niveles en España, Portugal, Brasil y Venezuela. Cult. Educ. 2019, 31, 326–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Posetti, J.; Matthews, A. A Short Guide to the History of ’Fake News’ and Disinformation; International Center for Journalists: Washongton, DC, USA, 2018; Volume 7. [Google Scholar]
- McDougall, J.; Zezulková, M.; Van Driel, B.; Sternadel, D. Teaching Media Literacy in Europe: Evidence of Effective School Practices in Primary and Secondary Education, NESET II Report; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg, 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Musgrove, A.T.; Powers, J.R.; Rebar, L.C.; Musgrove, G.J. Real or fake? Resources for teaching college students how to identify fake news. Coll. Undergrad. Libr. 2018, 25, 243–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alemanno, A. How to counter fake news? a taxonomy of anti-fake news approaches. Eur. J. Risk Regul. 2018, 9, 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Mele, N.; Lazer, D.; Baum, M.; Grinberg, N.; Friedland, L.; Joseph, K.; Hobbs, W.; Mattsson, C. Combating Fake News: An Agenda for Research and Action; Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Bmjv.de. Available online: https://bit.ly/3iQKBik (accessed on 18 August 2020).
- King, L. The Impact of Multilingualism on Global Education and Language Learning; Cambridge English Language Assessment: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Faustini, P.H.A.; Covões, T.F. Fake news detection in multiple platforms and languages. Expert Syst. Appl. 2020, 158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Note that the Ethics Committee at SNSPA does not have an identification code. The ethics certificate for the current research (with no identification number) has been issued by the Ethics Committee at SNSPA prior to the research and it could be available at any request.
|1||Leu et al. (2007)||53 school children, 13 years old||6 out of 53 school children (11%) recognized the hoax source as fake.|
|2||Loos et al. (2018)||27 school children, 11–12 years old||2 out of 27 respondents (4%) recognized the website as being a hoax and explained why.|
|3||Pilgrim et al. (2019)||68 students, first graders to fifth graders||24 out of 68 school children (35%) did not trust the hoax website.|
|1||Leu et al. (2007)||The students were exposed to the spoof site Save The Northwest Pacific Tree Octopus (http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus). They were then asked by another class through a fictional message to locate and evaluate the reliability of the spoof website. The students had to provide three reasons for their answer and summarize the most important information from that site. They were then asked to send an e-mail containing their information or to post this on a blog site. Following the activity, students were interviewed to ensure that they were familiar with the term “reliable”, an important concept in the task.|
|2||Loos et al. (2018)||The author of this article was introduced by the teacher to the schoolchildren. The teacher and the respondents were told that the experiment would be an online reading comprehension exercise. The children were asked to visit the hoax website (http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/) and were asked to look at it, click on any links, and not hurry. Then, they were asked to answer five questions, including Q3. If Greenpeace were to ask you to save this octopus, would you support this and sign? YES, because […] NO, because […] (choose one). The pupils who answered “YES” to Q3 were judged as perceiving the site as a reliable one. In this way, it was not necessary to explicitly ask about the reliability of the site, which would have risked priming them. The schoolchildren were debriefed after the session and they received a new media literacies training.|
|3||Pilgrim et al. (2019)||As part of a larger project, the authors used the tree octopus hoax website (http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/) and interviewed 68 students in first through fifth grade to explore their abilities to critically examine the hoax website for trustworthiness and reliability. In one-on-one interviews, students were asked to review the tree octopus website and were then asked, “How can you tell if this website has accurate (or true) information?”|
© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Dumitru, E.-A. Testing Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News: A Combined Design of Quasi-Experiment and Group Discussions. Societies 2020, 10, 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10030071
Dumitru E-A. Testing Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News: A Combined Design of Quasi-Experiment and Group Discussions. Societies. 2020; 10(3):71. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10030071Chicago/Turabian Style
Dumitru, Elena-Alexandra. 2020. "Testing Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News: A Combined Design of Quasi-Experiment and Group Discussions" Societies 10, no. 3: 71. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc10030071