Adolescents’ reasoning to manage fake news

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.31693

Keywords:

fake news, argumentation, confirmation bias, evidence use, counterargumentation, rebuttals, secondary education

Abstract

This study draws on literature on argumentation and critical thinking. Its main goal is to analyse teenagers’ critical thinking to manage scientific information in social networks. We analysed 95 ninth graders’ quality of argumentation on their degree of agreement and their degree of credibility of a fake news item. The design included a dependent variable (argumentative competence), two independent variables (degree of agreement, degree of credibility) and a covariate (reading comprehension). A significant correlation was found between the degree of agreement and the degree of credibility. In addition, the degree of credibility decreases significantly as reading comprehension increases. Students who positioned themselves against the claim of the fake news and those who did not believe it showed higher argumentative quality in their texts than those who both agreed with and believed it. These results bring evidence of the confirmation bias claim when we apply it to fake news. We tend to accept information that confirms our prior beliefs uncritically. Similarly, 83% of those who did not believe the content of the news would consult an additional text, compared to 62.5% of those who agreed with it. This is a result that highlights the urgency of implementing educational guidelines to help students develop critical skills to manage fake news.

Downloads

Author Biography

Andrea Miralda-Banda, University of Barcelona, Spain

 

 

References

Barrio-Cantalejo, I. M., Simón-Lorda, P., Melguizo, M., Escalona, I., Marijuán, M.I., & Hernando, P. (2008). Validación de la Escala INFLESZ para evaluar la legibilidad de los textos dirigidos a pacientes. Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, 31(2), 135-152. https://bit.ly/3uquFLi

Barzilai, S., & Chinn, C. A. (2020). A review of educational responses to the “post-truth” condition: Four lenses on “post-truth” problems. Educational Psychologist, 55(3), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2020.1786388

Buckingham, D. (2019). Teaching media in a ‘post-truth’ age: fake news, media bias and the challenge for media/digital literacy education. Culture & Education, 31(2), 213-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/11356405.2019.1603814

Carrasco, L. (2021, May 8th). El 54% de los estudiantes no sabe identificar ‘fake news’: un centenar de catedráticos plantea llevar a las aulas la lucha contra la desinformación. Info Libre. https://bit.ly/3LgNEi1

Cheng, C. H., Bråten, I., Yang, F. Y., & Brandmo, C. (2021). Investigating structural relationships among upper-secondary school students’ beliefs about knowledge, justification for knowing, and internet-specific justification in the domain of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58, 980–1009. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21689

Forte, A. & Bruckman, A. (2008). Learning information literacy in the age of Wikipedia. In Peters, V. L., Slotta, J. D., Forte, A., Bruckman, A. S., Lee, J. J., Gaydos, M., Hoadley, C., & Clarke, J. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 237-244). Utrecht, Netherlands. https://bit.ly/3IECrpR

Garcia-Mila, M., Pérez-Echeverria, M.P., Postigo, Y., Marti, E. Villarroel, C., & Gabucio, F. (2016). Nuclear power plants? Yes or no? Thank you! The argumentative use of tables and graphs / ¿Centrales nucleares? ¿Sí o no? ¡Gracias! El uso argumentativo de tablas y gráficas. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 16(1), 187-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2015.1111605

Gasser, U., Cortesi, S., Malik, M., & Lee, A. (2012). Youth and digital media: From credibility to information quality. Berkman Center Research Publication, (1). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2005272

Goldman, S. R., Braasch, J. L. G., Wiley, J., Graesser, A. C., & Brodowinska, K. (2012). Comprehending and learning from Internet sources: processing patterns of better and poorer learners. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(4), 356-381.

Grossman, P., Hammerness, K., & McDonald, M. (2009). Redefining teaching, re‐ imagining teacher education. Teachers and Teaching, 15(2), 273-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600902875340

Henderson, J. B., MacPherson, A., Osborne, J., & Wild, A. (2015). Beyond construction: Five arguments for the role and value of critique in learning science. International Journal of Science Education, 37(10), 1668-1697. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2015.1043598

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (2017). How To Spot Fake News [Infographic]. IFLA. https://repository.ifla.org/handle/123456789/167

Kendeou, P., Robinson, D. H., & McCrudden, M. T. (Eds.). (2019). Misinformation and fake news in education. IAP.

Kiili, C., Donald, J. L., Marttunen, M, Hautala J., & Leppänen, P. H. T. (2018). Exploring early adolescents’ evaluation of academic and commercial online resources related to health. Reading and Writing, 31(2), 533-557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-017-9797-2

Klaczynski, P. A., & Gordon, D. H. (1996). Everyday statistical reasoning during adolescence and young adulthood: Motivational, general ability, and developmental influences. Child Development, 67(6), 2873-2891. https://doi.org/10.2307/1131757

Kuhn, D. (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, D. (2005). Education for thinking. Harvard University Press.

Kuhn, D. (2019). Critical thinking as discourse. Human Development, 62(3),146-164. https://doi.org/10.1159/000500171

Lazer, D.M. J., Baum, M.A. Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A.J. Greenhill, K.M. Menczer, F., Metzger, M.J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, SM., Sloman, S.A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E.A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fakenews. Science 09, 359(6380), 1094-1096.

McCrudden, M. T. (2019). Attempting to reduce misinformation and other inaccuracies in education. eEn P. Kendeou, D. H. Robinson, & M. T. McCrudden (Eds.) Misinformation and fake news in education (pp. 305-317). IAP.

Macedo‐Rouet, M., Potocki, A., Scharrer, L., Ros, C., Stadtler, M., Salmerón, L., & Rouet, J. F. (2019). How good is this page? Benefits and limits of prompting on adolescents’ evaluation of web information quality. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(3), 299-321. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.241

Miralda-Banda, A., Garcia-Mila, M., & Felton, M. (2021). Concept of evidence and the quality of evidence‑based reasoning in elementary students. Topoi, 40, 359–372. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-019-09685-y

Moran, P. (2020). Social media: A pandemic of misinformation. The American Journal of Medicine, 133(11), 1247–1248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2020.05.021

Nadal, E., Miras, M., Castells, N., & Paz, S. D. L. (2021). Intervención en escritura de síntesis a partir de fuentes: Impacto de la comprensión. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 26(88), 95-122. http://www.scielo.org.mx/pdf/rmie/v26n88/1405-6666-rmie-26-88-95.pdf

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175

Parra-Valero, P., & Oliveira, L. (2018). Fake news: una revisión sistemática de la literatura/ Fake news: a systematic review of the literature. (OBS*) Observatorio: Special Issue, 54-78.

Sperber, D., Clément, F., Heintz, C., Mascaro, O., Mercier, H., Origgi, G., & Wilson, D. (2010). Epistemic vigilance. Mind & Language, 25(4), 359-393. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0017.2010.01394.x

Taber, C., & Lodge, M. (2012). Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society, 24(2), 157-184. https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2012.711019

Tseng, A. S. (2018). Students and evaluation of web-based misinformation about vaccination: critical reading or passive acceptance of claims? International Journal of Science Education, 8(3), 250-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21548455.2018.1479800

Tseng, S., & Fogg, B. J. (1999). Credibility and computing technology. Communications of the ACM, 42(5), 39-44. https://doi.org/10.1145/301353.301402

Toulmin, S. (1958). The uses of argument. Cambridge University Press.

Vidal-Abarca, E., Gilabert, R., Martínez, T., Sellés, P., Abad, N., & Ferrer, C. (2007). Test de Estrategias de Comprensión [Test of comprehension strategies]. Instituto Calasanz de Ciencias de la Educación.

Villarroel, C., Felton, M., & Garcia-Mila, M. (2016). Arguing against confirmation bias: The effect of argumentative discourse goals on the use of disconfirming evidence in written argument. International Journal of Educational Research, 767-179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2016.06.009

Wineburg, S., McGrew, S., Breakstone, J., & Ortega, T. (2016). Evaluating information: The cornerstone of civic online reasoning. Stanford Digital Repository, 8. http://purl.stanford.edu/fv751yt5934

Yacoubian, H. A., & Khishfe, R. (2018). Argumentation, critical thinking, nature of science and socio scientific issues: a dialogue between two researchers. International Journal of Science Education, 40(7), 796-807. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1449986

Published

2022-06-29

How to Cite

Castells, N., Garcia-Mila, M., Miralda-Banda, A., Jose, L., & Pérez, E. (2022). Adolescents’ reasoning to manage fake news. Educación XX1, 25(2), 291–313. https://doi.org/10.5944/educxx1.31693

Issue

Section

Estudios

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.