The trustworthiness of peers and public discourse: exploring how people navigate numerical dis/misinformation on personal messaging platforms

Numbers are essential to how citizens understand the world, but also have distinctive power to confuse or manipulate. Numerical claims permeate online dis/misinformation, yet relatively little is known about how people engage with them. We conducted in-depth interviews (W1N = 102, W2N = 80) to explore how people gauge the trustworthiness of numbers on personal messaging platforms – highly popular yet difficult-to-research online spaces. Adopting a relational approach to informational trustworthiness, we find that numbers were not perceived as objective facts but as biased, technical, and verifiable. This spurred participants to engage in three practices to establish trustworthiness: contextualising peers’ motivations with reference to public discourse, selectively trusting peers’ competence in light of public signals of salient expertise, and using public sources to assess what peers share. These practices, which we found endured over time, suggest that norms of verification and correction on messaging platforms involve a complex integration of information from interpersonal relationships and public discourse.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Information Communication & Society
Published
2024-09-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2024.2400141
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.26

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The trustworthiness of peers and public discourse: exploring how people navigate numerical dis/misinformation on personal messaging platforms

Cristian Vaccari, Natalie-Anne Hall, Andrew Chadwick, Brendan Lawson
2 citations
Information Communication & Society
Misinformation and Its Impacts
2.26
article

The trustworthiness of peers and public discourse: exploring how people navigate numerical dis/misinformation on personal messaging platforms

Cristian Vaccari, Natalie-Anne Hall, Andrew Chadwick, Brendan Lawson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Numbers are essential to how citizens understand the world, but also have distinctive power to confuse or manipulate. Numerical claims permeate online dis/misinformation, yet relatively little is known about how people engage with them. We conducted in-depth interviews (W1N = 102, W2N = 80) to explore how people gauge the trustworthiness of numbers on personal messaging platforms – highly popular yet difficult-to-research online spaces. Adopting a relational approach to informational trustworthiness, we find that numbers were not perceived as objective facts but as biased, technical, and verifiable. This spurred participants to engage in three practices to establish trustworthiness: contextualising peers’ motivations with reference to public discourse, selectively trusting peers’ competence in light of public signals of salient expertise, and using public sources to assess what peers share. These practices, which we found endured over time, suggest that norms of verification and correction on messaging platforms involve a complex integration of information from interpersonal relationships and public discourse.

Information Communication & SocietyVol. 28(4)
Loughborough University (GB)
Leverhulme Trust
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
2.26
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.