The Roles of Source Citations in Identifying Misinformation and Disinformation: Moderating Effects of Digital Literacy and Information Types

This study investigates whether source citations enhance detection of false information and whether their effects depend on digital literacy and information processing style. In an experimental survey of 1,013 South Koreans, citations show no overall effect. However, they significantly improve detection of disinformation—but not misinformation—among individuals with higher digital literacy. Intuitive processing lowers detection ability, and citations do not counteract this tendency. The findings challenge assumptions that transparency universally improves evaluation, showing that citation effectiveness depends on user capabilities and the type of falsehood, and highlighting the need to strengthen digital literacy alongside transparency initiatives.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Published
2026-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990261472455
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

The Roles of Source Citations in Identifying Misinformation and Disinformation: Moderating Effects of Digital Literacy and Information Types

Seungheon Han, Ha Jin Hwang, Sung‐Bou Kim, Kyungwoo Kim
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

The Roles of Source Citations in Identifying Misinformation and Disinformation: Moderating Effects of Digital Literacy and Information Types

Seungheon Han, Ha Jin Hwang, Sung‐Bou Kim, Kyungwoo Kim
article en

Abstract

This study investigates whether source citations enhance detection of false information and whether their effects depend on digital literacy and information processing style. In an experimental survey of 1,013 South Koreans, citations show no overall effect. However, they significantly improve detection of disinformation—but not misinformation—among individuals with higher digital literacy. Intuitive processing lowers detection ability, and citations do not counteract this tendency. The findings challenge assumptions that transparency universally improves evaluation, showing that citation effectiveness depends on user capabilities and the type of falsehood, and highlighting the need to strengthen digital literacy alongside transparency initiatives.

Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
University of North Texas (US), Public Policy Institute of California (US), RAND Corporation (US), Ewha Womans University (KR), Pusan National University (KR), University at Buffalo, State University of New York (US), The Korea Institute of Public Administration (KR)
National Disaster Management Research Institute
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
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.