Changing the incentive structure of social media platforms to halt the spread of misinformation
- Affective Brain Lab, Department of Experimental Psychology, University College London, United Kingdom
- The Max Planck UCL Centre for Computational Psychiatry and Ageing Research, University College London, United Kingdom
- Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States
Figures
Figure 1
Theoretical framework.
(a) The current incentive structure (blue) is such that the veracity of shared information is dissociated from rewards (‘carrots’) and punishments (‘sticks’). That is, true information and …
Figure 2 with 1 supplement
Task (Experiment 1).
Participants observed a series of 100 posts in random order (50 true, 50 false). Their task was to react using one or more of the ‘like’, ‘dislike’, ‘trust’, or ‘distrust’ buttons or to skip. The …
Figure 2—figure supplement 1
Instructions for Experiment 1.
At the start of the experiment participants received extensive instructions explaining the task.
Figure 3 with 1 supplement
Participants use ‘trust’ and ‘distrust’ reactions to discern true from false information.
‘Distrust’ and ‘trust’ reactions were used in a more discerning manner than ‘like’ and ‘dislike’ reactions. Y axis shows discernment between true and false posts. For positive reactions (e.g., ‘likes…
Figure 3—figure supplement 1
Participants’ use ‘(Dis)Trust’ buttons to discern true from false information (Experiment 4).
Experiment 4 is a replication of Experiment 1, in which participants (N=50) observe posts (half true half false) and can respond by clicking all, none or some of the following buttons: ‘like’, …
Figure 4 with 2 supplements
Task.
In Experiment 2 on each of 100 trials participants observed a post (50 true, 50 false content). They then chose whether to share it or skip (self-paced). They were told that if they chose to share a …
Figure 4—figure supplement 1
Instructions for Experiment 2.
At the start of the experiment participants received extensive instructions explaining the task. Depending on which condition they were assigned to participants would receive Instructions for either …
Figure 4—figure supplement 2
Instructions for Experiment 3.
At the start of the experiment participants received extensive instructions explaining the task. Depending on which condition they were assigned to participants would receive Instructions for either …
Figure 5 with 1 supplement
Altering the incentive structure of social media environments increases discernment of information shared.
(a) Participants (N=288) operating in an environment where ‘(Dis)Trust’ feedback was introduced shared more true information relative to false information than participants operating in an …
Figure 5—figure supplement 1
‘(Dis)Trust’ feedback improves discernment in sharing behavior (Experiments 5 and 6).
(a) Experiment 5 and (b) Experiment 6 are replications of Experiments 2 and 3. (a) In Experiment 5 participants (N=261) observed the same 100 posts (50 true, 50 false) shown to participants in …
Figure 6
‘(Dis)Trust’ feedback increases the drift rate.
Displayed are the posterior distributions of parameter estimates for the Baseline environment, the ‘(Dis)Like’ environment and the ‘(Dis)Trust’ environment. Dashed vertical lines indicate respective …
Figure 7
Simulated data reproduced experimental findings.
One-way ANOVAs revealed that In both (a) Experiment 2 (N=288) and (c) Experiment 3 (N=391) participants who received ‘(Dis)Trust’ feedback were more discerning than participants in the ‘(Dis)Like’ …
Tables
Table 1
Group estimates for drift-diffusion model (DDM) in Experiment 2.
| Estimate | Baseline | ‘(Dis)Like’ | ‘(Dis)Trust’ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distance between decision thresholds (α) | 2.153 95% CI [2.09; 2.214] | 2.373 95% CI [2.281; 2.466] | 2.403 95% CI [2.280; 2.529] |
| Non-decision time (t0) | 7.025 95% CI [6.898; 7.154] | 6.936 95% CI [6.802; 7.071] | 6.681 95% CI [6.425; 6.94] |
| Starting point (z) | 0.497 95% CI [0.486; 0.508] | 0.491 95% CI [0.483; 0.50] | 0.48 95% CI [0.471; 0.49] |
| Drift rate (v) | 0.098 95% CI [0.039; 0.158] | 0.10 95% CI [0.056; 0.145] | 0.216 95% CI [0.17; 0.262] |
Table 2
Group estimates for drift-diffusion model (DDM) in Experiment 3.
| Estimate | Baseline | ‘(Dis)Like’ | ‘(Dis)Trust’ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distance between decision thresholds (α) | 2.238 95% CI [2.153; 2.328] | 2.207 95% CI [2.132; 2.286] | 2.209 95% CI [2.134; 2.286] |
| Non-decision time (t0) | 6.9 95% CI [6.762; 7.04] | 7.051 95% CI [6.918; 7.186] | 7.076 95% CI [6.944; 7.208] |
| Starting point (z) | 0.5 95% CI [0.49; 0.51] | 0.5 95% CI [0.49; 0.511] | 0.489 95% CI [0.476; 0.5] |
| Drift rate (v) | 0.006 95% CI [−0.027; 0.037] | 0.037 95% CI [0.002; 0.069] | 0.12 95% CI [0.086; 0.155] |
Additional files
-
Supplementary file 1
Discernment of reactions (Experiment 1).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp1-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 2
% Reactions out of all posts (Experiment 1).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp2-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 3
Discernment of reactions (Experiment 4, including type x valence of reaction interaction).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp3-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 4
% true and false posts shared out of all true or false posts in that feedback condition (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp4-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 5
Discernment of sharing behavior (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp5-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 6
% posts shared out of all posts (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp6-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 7
Discernment of sharing behavior (Experiment 5).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp7-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 8
Belief Accuracy (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp8-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 9
Belief Accuracy (Experiment 5).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp9-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 10
Discernment of sharing behavior (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp10-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 11
% posts shared out of all posts (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp11-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 12
Belief Accuracy (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp12-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 13
Mean difference in posterior distributions and 95% HDI Comparison (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp13-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 14
Mean difference in posterior distributions and 95% HDI Comparison (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp14-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 15
Group estimates for DDM (Experiment 5).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp15-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 16
Mean difference in posterior distributions and 95% HDI Comparison (Experiment 5).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp16-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 17
Group estimates for DDM (Experiment 6).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp17-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 18
Mean difference in posterior distributions and 95% HDI Comparison (Experiment 6).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp18-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 19
Recovered Group estimates for DDM based on simulated data (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp19-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 20
Recovered Group estimates for DDM based on simulated data (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp20-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 21
Pairwise Comparisons for Discernment (Experiment 2).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp21-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 22
Pairwise Comparisons for Discernment (Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp22-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 23
Correlations between participants’ real and recovered DDM estimates (Experiment 2 and Experiment 3).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp23-v1.docx
-
Supplementary file 24
Individual Ratings per Stimulus (Experiment 1).
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-supp24-v1.docx
-
MDAR checklist
- https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/85767/elife-85767-mdarchecklist1-v1.pdf
