Search

The spread of misinformation on social media is a critical issue. One potential solution to mitigate the spread is user corrections; however, users often refrain due to various concerns. Leveraging the established influence of user interface design (UID) on how user interact with and respond to misinformation, this study investigates how user interface features can be designed to motivate users to challenge misinformation. It is aimed at gaining insights into users' needs and UID requirements that encourage this behaviour. We conducted four codesign sessions with 18 social media users (age range 20–60 years M = 39.1; 10 female and 8 male). We applied the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) as a theoretical framework and analysed our data based on the core constructs of this framework: performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, and facilitating conditions. Our findings reveal four design considerations: creating secure and supportive environments, facilitating informed discussions through easy confrontation and access to reliable resources, leveraging recognition and social proof, and user support infrastructure. We also identified specific design elements with users, including indirection, semianonymity and privacy, simplicity, one‐click challenging, easy access to reliable sources, recognition, displaying social proof, and platform support. These elements are aimed at reducing social discomfort and making the process of correcting misinformation more approachable for users. Our findings offer actionable insights for social media platform designers to reduce the spread of misinformation by creating environments that encourage constructive dialogues and allow users to challenge misinformation without fear of conflict. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the barriers to challenging others who post misinformation on social media platforms. We conducted a survey amongst U.K. Facebook users (143 (57.2 %) women, 104 (41.6 %) men) to assess the extent to which the barriers to correcting others, as identified in literature across disciplines, apply to correcting misinformation on social media. We also group the barriers into factors and explore demographic differences amongst them. It has been suggested that users are generally hesitant to challenge misinformation. We found that most of our participants (58.8 %) were reluctant to challenge misinformation. We also identified moderating roles of age and gender in the likelihood of challenging misinformation. Older people were more likely to challenge misinformation compared to young adults while, men demonstrated a slightly greater likelihood to challenge compared to women. The 20 barriers influencing the decision to challenge misinformation, were then grouped into four main factors: social concerns, effort/interest considerations, prosocial intents, and content-related factors. We found that, controlling for age and gender, "social concerns" and "effort/interest considerations" have the significant impact on likelihood to challenge. Identified four factors were analysed in terms of demographic differences. Men ranked "effort/interest considerations" higher than women, while women placed higher importance on "content-related factors". Moreover, older individuals were found to be more resilient to "social concerns". The influence of educational background was most prominent in ranking "content-related factors". Our findings provide important insights for the design of future interventions aimed at encouraging the challenging of misinformation on social media platforms, highlighting the need for tailored, demographically sensitive approaches. • Study examines 22 barriers to challenging social media misinformation on Facebook. • Most of the participants are reluctant to challenge misinformation on social media. • Age and gender influence likelihood to challenge misinformation. • Barriers of confronting: social concerns, effort/interest, prosocial intent, content. • Age and gender impact engagement with misinformation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]