Detecting Disinformation about Health in Social Media: A Review of Four Inductive Studies

Social media enable fast and widespread dissemination of information, both honest and dishonest. Misinformation is generally spread unintentionally. Disinformation, on the other hand, is intentionally dishonest and is designed to harm individuals and organizations, which usually benefts the sender fnancially. Health-related disinformation can be especially dangerous if people act on its claims. How do people determine if health content on social media is honest or if it contains disinformation? This review considers four papers about inductive research studies, where participants were exposed to actual social media posts about 10 health topics, ranging from weight loss to COVID-19 vaccines. Some of the posts were honest and some were dishonest. Participants in all four studies were asked to evaluate the veracity of the posts that they saw and to provide the reasons for their evaluations. Two studies were online surveys. The other studies were conducted in the lab, where the eye movements of participants were recorded with an eye tracker. The key fndings from the review were: (1) People were relatively good at detecting health-related disinformation, with detection success rates ranging from 66% to 90%; (2) People most frequently cited the quality of the source of a post as the reason they decided it was honest; (3) Variables key to successful detection were need for cognition and gender (and to a lesser extent, political aÿliation, education, and age); (4) In the eye tracking studies, the most common determinants of fxations on particular parts of a post were need for cognition, gender, and the veracity of the post; (5) The most important measure of fxation that infuenced detection success was number of fxations; and (6) Overall, need for cognition was the key factor in successful disinformation detection.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems
Published
2025-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1561/2900000042
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Detecting Disinformation about Health in Social Media: A Review of Four Inductive Studies

Joey F. George, Sophia Mannina
Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

Detecting Disinformation about Health in Social Media: A Review of Four Inductive Studies

Joey F. George, Sophia Mannina
article en

Abstract

Social media enable fast and widespread dissemination of information, both honest and dishonest. Misinformation is generally spread unintentionally. Disinformation, on the other hand, is intentionally dishonest and is designed to harm individuals and organizations, which usually benefts the sender fnancially. Health-related disinformation can be especially dangerous if people act on its claims. How do people determine if health content on social media is honest or if it contains disinformation? This review considers four papers about inductive research studies, where participants were exposed to actual social media posts about 10 health topics, ranging from weight loss to COVID-19 vaccines. Some of the posts were honest and some were dishonest. Participants in all four studies were asked to evaluate the veracity of the posts that they saw and to provide the reasons for their evaluations. Two studies were online surveys. The other studies were conducted in the lab, where the eye movements of participants were recorded with an eye tracker. The key fndings from the review were: (1) People were relatively good at detecting health-related disinformation, with detection success rates ranging from 66% to 90%; (2) People most frequently cited the quality of the source of a post as the reason they decided it was honest; (3) Variables key to successful detection were need for cognition and gender (and to a lesser extent, political aÿliation, education, and age); (4) In the eye tracking studies, the most common determinants of fxations on particular parts of a post were need for cognition, gender, and the veracity of the post; (5) The most important measure of fxation that infuenced detection success was number of fxations; and (6) Overall, need for cognition was the key factor in successful disinformation detection.

Foundations and Trends® in Information SystemsVol. 9(3)
Iowa State University (US), Queen's University (CA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
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.

Detecting Disinformation about Health in Social Media: A Review of Four Inductive Studies — Joey F. George, Sophia Mannina · Foundations and Trends® in Information Systems (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS