Search results

To elaborate the nature of fact-checking in the domain of political information by examining how fact-checkers assess the validity of claims concerning the Russo-Ukrainian conflict and how they support their assessments by drawing on evidence acquired from diverse sources of information.

Descriptive quantitative and qualitative content analysis of 128 reports written by the fact-checkers of Snopes – an established fact-checking organisation – during the period of 24 February 2022 – 28 June, 2023. For the analysis, nine evaluation grounds were identified, most of them inductively from the empirical material. It was examined how the fact-checkers employed such grounds while assessing the validity of claims and how the assessments were bolstered by evidence acquired from information sources such as newspapers.

Of the 128 reports, the share of assessments indicative of the invalidity of the claims was 54.7%, while the share of positive ratings was 26.7%. The share of mixed assessments was 15.6%. In the fact-checking, two evaluation grounds, that is, the correctness of information and verifiability of an event presented in a claim formed the basis for the assessment. Depending on the topic of the claim, grounds such as temporal and spatial compatibility, as well as comparison by similarity and difference occupied a central role. Most popular sources of information offering evidence for the assessments include statements of government representatives, videos and photographs shared in social media, newspapers and television programmes.

As the study concentrated on fact-checking dealing with political information about a specific issue, the findings cannot be extended to concern the fact-checking practices in other contexts.

The study is among the first to characterise how fact-checkers employ evaluation grounds of diverse kind while assessing the validity of political information.

This research examines the evolution of automated fact-checking at Africa Check, a prominent fact-checking organisation based in South Africa, Kenya, Nigeria and Senegal, through the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) tools into its fact-checking process. The progress focuses on three phases, which include claim detection to identify check-worthy claims, claim matching to retrieve already verified information and robot-checking to validate claims. The methodology used in this study involved analysing the experiences of reporters and editors from Africa Check. In-depth interviews were conducted to reveal the advances in time and effort required to verify information, providing key insights into the relationship between technology and journalism. The findings also shed light on how AI can be used to combat misinformation and promote media literacy in Africa, demonstrating how the adoption of AI has helped Africa Check to expand its reach and increase its impact. As a result, these improvements have profound implications for political accountability, trust in the media, and the fight against misinformation. This research offers valuable contributions to the ongoing debates about the adoption of technology in journalism and the importance of leveraging technology to strengthen the relationship between journalists and their audiences.

Human dignity is a crucial concept in international and domestic human rights law. It is understood to be the foundation of human rights, and while we know what human rights are, the nature, content, and grounds of human dignity remain unclear. The aim of this chapter is to propose scientific grounds for human dignity. In this context, the author will explore contemporary evolutionary biology and evolutionary psychology, where it is claimed that human nature is constituted by tendencies to cooperate (Tomasello, 2009), or under a different formulation, by narrow altruism and imperfect prudence (Załuski, 2009). Evolutionary psychology holds that we have basic tendencies to cooperate with one another and to behave altruistically in order to achieve a common good. This means that our basic evolutionary default and scientifically proven mode of being are optimistic and can be labelled as morally good. The author argues that this human nature constitutes scientific grounds for human dignity. The author’s argument holds that since human dignity comprises the inherent worth of every human being, this positive moral fact about the scientifically understood human nature is human dignity. The author then present this issue within two broader philosophical frameworks of analytic philosophy – namely, naturalism (especially methodological naturalism) and metaphysical realism. Following this, the author contends that references to natural sciences in debates on the foundations of human dignity and human rights argue against the strongest objection to human rights – the objection of Western ethnocentrism.

This essay summarizes the formation of the concept of “sociality” as it was developed in The Concept of the Social in Uniting the Humanities and Social Sciences. Its thesis is that if the human sciences are to have a representative discipline – in contrast with a field of largely topical studies – that defines human reality in the course of its work, then that discipline must have a concept of its distinctive reality, and the basic fact that the concept describes must be indisputable: that is, it must be irreducible and irrepressible as well as distinctively human. These qualities are satisfied by the formula “each-dependent-on-All,” where each shows itself as “intra-dependence” and, therefore, as “being-in-the-middle” of a “course of activity without immanent beginning and end.” This concept is then applied to theoretical positions presented or hinted at by the other chapters of this volume in order (1) to see how a given theory might differ from what is conventionally taught as sociological theory when the basic fact is systematically taken into account, and (2) to find among the implications of the concept a dialectic of social progress and societal change that is incompatible with received positive ideas of society, e.g., as an entity, system, or totality and compatible with the idea of such an apparent formation as a project in which the manifold (internal) relations of each-dependent-on-All present social progress as the ongoing reality of human reality.

What is the relationship between the descriptive and the normative? The usual answer, in the social sciences, is based on a sharp distinction between facts and values. This chapter reprises and radicalizes long-standing critiques of the fact/value distinction, proposes an alternative theory of ontic webs in its stead, and then uses it to delineate six different forms of public sociology. It argues that facts are value-laden and values fact-laden; that facts and values are entangled in webs of belief and practice; and that attributions of causation and moral responsibility are connected via ontological assumptions. Effective public sociology therefore requires a combination of ontological extension and moral translation.

The purpose of this column is to look at how US copyright law deals with facts and what can reasonably be considered as a fact.

The US statutes and case law are examined, as well as standard practices within academic settings for the use and analysis of facts.

Using facts may require a risk assessment under certain circumstances. Although facts cannot be protected under US law, compilations of facts can have protection under the European Database Directive, and certain apparent facts, such as normal human body temperature, represent judgments based on extensive research and analysis. It is not always clear when a research result achieves the status of a fact and is therefore exempt from copyright protection.

The use of facts is an essential part of scholarly work and factual compilations are important tools for many scholarly communities. Understanding how far facts may be used and manipulated helps researchers and teachers who have grown anxious about copyright infringement.

Given the rapid growth in efforts on misinformation correction, the study aims to test how evidence type and veracity interact with news agreement on the effectiveness of fact-checking on how well a corrective message discount a false news information.

Experimental participants (N = 511) in Hong Kong were exposed to the same news article and then to a piece of corrective information debunking the news article with variation in the types of evidence (numerical vs narrative) and veracity (no verdict vs half false vs entirely false) in 2019.

Among the participants who disagreed with the news article, numerical fact-checking was more effective than narrative fact-checking in discounting the news article. Some evidence of the backfire effect was found among participants for whom the article was attitude incongruent.

When debunking false information with people exposed to attitude-incongruent news, a milder verdict presented in the form of a half-false scale can prompt a more positive perception of the issue at stake than an entirely false scale, implying that a less certain verdict can help in mitigating the backfire effect compared to a certain verdict.

Fact-checking is a process of seeking and displaying facts to confirm or counter uncertain information, which reduces the spread of fake news. However, little is known about how to promote fact-checking posts to online users on social media. Through uncertainty reduction theory and message framing, this first study examines the effect of fact-checking posts on social media with an avatar on online users' trust, attitudes, and behavioral intentions. The authors further investigate the congruency effects between promotional message framing (gain/loss/neutral) and facial expressions of the avatar (happy/angry/neutral) on online users' trust, attitudes, and behavioral intentions in the second study.

The authors conducted two studies and statistically analyzed 120 samples (study 1) and 519 samples (study 2) from Facebook users.

Results showed that including the neutral facial expression avatar in fact-checking posts leads to online users' greater trust and more positive attitudes. Furthermore, the congruency effects between loss message framing and the angry facial expression of the avatar can effectively promote online users' trust and attitudes as well as stronger intentions to follow and share.

This study offers theoretical implications for fact-checking studies, and practical implications for online fact-checkers to apply these findings to design effective fact-checking posts and spread the veracity of information on social media.

This study aims to identify effective ways to promote plant-based foods in quick-service restaurants by considering customers’ food-related health involvement.

This study conducted a 2 (message format: myth/fact or fact-only) × 2 (message focus: benefit- or attribute-focused) × 2 (health involvement: high or low) quasi-experimental design via a scenario-based online survey. A multivariate analysis of covariance and a bootstrapping approach were used to test the hypotheses (N = 365).

The results indicated that message format and focus jointly influenced customers’ perceived health consequences of plant-based foods and purchase intentions; customers’ health involvement altered the two-way interaction between message format and focus; and perceived health consequences mediated the effects of message format and focus as and customers’ health involvement on purchase intentions.

This study identifies the effectiveness of message format and focus in promoting plant-based foods and extends the sustainable product promotion literature by using resource matching theory and the elaboration likelihood model. Future studies should use field studies to examine how can message framing influence customers’ actual behaviors when purchasing plant-based foods.

This study can help quick-service restaurants better promote plant-based foods considering message format and focus and customers’ food-related health involvement.

This is one of only a few studies that have tested how messages containing both negative and positive information about a product could help promote plant-based foods.

Chinese multinational enterprises’ (MNEs) unprecedented, aggressive cross-border mergers and acquisitions (CBMAs) have led to several studies examining Chinese CBMAs, which importantly has also led to some degree of “theorising”. This study aims to undertake a “non-theoretical” fact-finding exercise before any theorising and empirical “causal” examination for a better understanding of the phenomenon (the rise of Chinese CBMAs).

This study uses a “stylised facts” approach which documents “empirical regularities” concerning Chinese CBMAs and thus guides new research questions.

Several facts are documented. Firstly, both the value and frequency of Chinese CBMAs are catching up to greenfield investments, with CBMA deals being larger in scale but lower in frequency. Secondly, Chinese CBMAs show a global reach away from the regional orientation of their early years. Thirdly, Chinese MNEs are possibly transforming their value chain with industrial upgrading as an aim. Fourthly, Chinese “full” acquisitions of targets have surged, especially in OECD countries, suggestive of Chinese MNEs’ “radical” acquisition approaches.

The gathered facts lend support to the view of the need for such fact-finding exercises to explicate and shed “new” light on the phenomenon (beyond our “current” views/beliefs). An understanding of the underlying trends beyond bare facts can also identify new knowledge, which can in turn provide new directions for research.