During the COVID-19 pandemic, the World Health Organization provided a checklist to help people distinguish between accurate and misinformation. In controlled experiments in the United States and Germany, we investigated the utility of this ordered checklist and designed an interactive version to lower the cost of acting on checklist items. Across interventions, we observe non-trivial differences in participants' performance in distinguishing accurate and misinformation between the two countries and discuss some possible reasons that may predict the future helpfulness of the checklist in different environments. The checklist item that provides source labels was most frequently followed and was considered most helpful. Based on our empirical findings, we recommend practitioners focus on providing source labels rather than interventions that support readers performing their own fact-checks, even though this recommendation may be influenced by the WHO's chosen order. We discuss the complexity of providing such source labels and provide design recommendations.
翻译:在COVID-19大流行期间,世界卫生组织提供了一份清单,帮助人们区分准确性和误报性;在美国和德国的受控实验中,我们调查了这一定购清单的效用,并设计了一个互动版本,以降低对清单项目采取行动的费用;在干预中,我们观察到参与者在区分两国间准确性和误报性方面的非两极性差异,并讨论了可能预测清单在不同环境中未来有用性的一些可能原因;提供源标签的核对清单项目经常被采用,被认为是非常有用的。根据我们的经验调查结果,我们建议从业者侧重于提供源标签,而不是采取干预措施,支持读者进行自己的实况调查,尽管这项建议可能受到卫生组织选定的命令的影响。我们讨论了提供这种源标签和提供设计建议的复杂性。