Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
41 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Children, Parents, and Misinformation on Social Media (2312.09359v1)

Published 14 Dec 2023 in cs.CY

Abstract: Children encounter misinformation on social media in a similar capacity as their parents. Unlike their parents, children are an exceptionally vulnerable population because their cognitive abilities and emotional regulation are still maturing, rendering them more susceptible to misinformation and falsehoods online. Yet, little is known about children's experience with misinformation as well as what their parents think of the misinformation's effect on child development. To answer these questions, we combined a qualitative survey of parents (n=87) with semi-structured interviews of both parents and children (n=12). We found that children usually encounter deep fakes, memes with political context, or celebrity/influencer rumors on social media. Children revealed they "ask Siri" whether a social media video or post is true or not before they search on Google or ask their parents about it. Parents expressed discontent that their children are impressionable to misinformation, stating that the burden falls on them to help their children develop critical thinking skills for navigating falsehoods on social media. Here, the majority of parents felt that schools should also teach these skills as well as media literacy to their children. Misinformation, according to both parents and children affects the family relationships especially with grandparents with different political views than theirs.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (60)
  1. C. Sense, “2021 the common sense census,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/research/report/8-18-census-integrated-report-final-web_0.pdf?ref=mrjugendarbeit.com
  2. ——, “New survey reveals teens get their news from social media and youtube,” Aug 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/new-survey-reveals-teens-get-their-news-from-social-media-and-youtube-300900557.html
  3. N. Grant, “Youtube may have misinformation blind spots, researchers say,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/05/technology/youtube-misinformation.htm
  4. J. Brewster, L. Arvanitis, V. Pavilonis, and M. Wang, “Beware the ‘new google:’ tiktok’s search engine pumps toxic misinformation to its young users,” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-monitor/september-2022/
  5. YouTube, “Covid-19 medical misinformation policy,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/9891785?hl=en
  6. TikTok, “Tiktok safety,” 2023, https://www.tiktok.com/safety/en-us/topics/.
  7. U.S. Code, “Children’s online privacy protection rule (coppa),” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid%3AUSC-prelim-title15-section6501&edition=prelim
  8. N. Alomar and S. Egelman, “Developers say the darnedest things: Privacy compliance processes followed by developers of child-directed apps,” Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, vol. 2022, no. 4, p. 250–273, 2022.
  9. J. Paolillo, B. Harper, C. Boothby, and D. Axelrod, “Youtube children’s videos: development of a genre under algorithm,” in Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2020.
  10. K. Papadamou, A. Papasavva, S. Zannettou, J. Blackburn, N. Kourtellis, I. Leontiadis, G. Stringhini, and M. Sirivianos, “Disturbed youtube for kids: Characterizing and detecting inappropriate videos targeting young children,” Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, vol. 14, p. 522–533, 2020.
  11. A. Cadier and M. Goldin, “Toxic tiktok: Popular social-media video app feeds vaccine misinformation to kids within minutes after they sign up,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.newsguardtech.com/special-reports/toxic-tiktok/
  12. BBC Newsroom, “Ai used to target kids with disinformation,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/66796495
  13. E. Tartari, “Benefits and risks of children and adolescents using social media,” European Scientific Journal, ESJ, vol. 11, no. 13, May 2015. [Online]. Available: https://eujournal.org/index.php/esj/article/view/5654
  14. E. Bozzola, G. Spina, R. Agostiniani, S. Barni, R. Russo, E. Scarpato, A. Di Mauro, A. V. Di Stefano, C. Caruso, G. Corsello, and et al., “The use of social media in children and adolescents: Scoping review on the potential risks,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, vol. 19, no. 16, p. 9960, 2022.
  15. A. C. Baldry, A. Sorrentino, and D. P. Farrington, “Cyberbullying and cybervictimization versus parental supervision, monitoring and control of adolescents’ online activities,” Children and Youth Services Review, vol. 96, pp. 302–307, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0190740918307035
  16. M. Drouin, B. T. McDaniel, J. Pater, and T. Toscos, “How parents and their children used social media and technology at the beginning of the covid-19 pandemic and associations with anxiety,” Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, vol. 23, no. 11, pp. 727–736, 2020, pMID: 32726144. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0284
  17. Centers for Disease Control (CDC), “Child developement,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/childdevelopment/index.html
  18. P. J. Landrigan et al., “Children as a vulnerable population,” International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 175–178, 2004.
  19. fact-check.org, “Factcheck.org: A project of the annenberg public policy center of the university of pennsylvania,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.factcheck.org
  20. Snopes, “Snopes,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.snopes.com
  21. J. Bhabha, “The child: What sort of human?” PMLA, vol. 121, no. 5, pp. 1526–1535, 2006. [Online]. Available: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25501622
  22. P. Howard, L.-M. Neudert, N. Prakash, and S. Vosloo, “Rapid analysis digital misinformation / disinformation and … - unicef,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.unicef.org/globalinsight/media/2096/file/UNICEF-Global-Insight-Digital-Mis-Disinformation-and-Children-2021.pdf
  23. J. Neda John, “Why generation z falls for online misinformation,” 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/30/10263
  24. M. Götz, C. Mendel, D. Lemish, N. Jennings, R. Hains, F. Abdul, M. Alper, H. Asgari, H. Babayaro, C. Blaya et al., “Children, covid-19 and the media,” Televizion, vol. 33, pp. 4–9, 2020.
  25. B. Holznagel, “Gesetz zur verbesserung der rechtsdurchsetzung in sozialen netzwerken,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/510884/f1b4c089c611b0dadf00a367407a462d/holznagel-data.pdf
  26. K. Greškovičová, R. Masaryk, N. Synak, and V. Čavojová, “Superlatives, clickbaits, appeals to authority, poor grammar, or boldface: Is editorial style related to the credibility of online health messages?” Frontiers in Psychology, vol. 13, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.940903
  27. T. S. Miika Marttunen and J. Utriainen, “Student evaluations of the credibility and argumentation of online sources,” The Journal of Educational Research, vol. 114, no. 3, pp. 294–305, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2021.1929052
  28. C. S. Beatriz Feijoo and L. Zozaya, “Distrust by default: analysis of parent and child reactions to health misinformation exposure on tiktok,” International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, vol. 28, no. 1, p. 2244595, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2023.2244595
  29. B. Donald, “Stanford researchers find students have trouble judging the credibility of information online,” Dec 2016. [Online]. Available: https://ed.stanford.edu/news/stanford-researchers-find-students-have-trouble-judging-credibility-information-online
  30. J. Breakstone, M. Smith, S. Wineburg, A. Rapaport, J. Carle, M. Garland, and A. Saavedra, “Students’ civic online reasoning: A national portrait,” Educational Researcher, vol. 50, no. 8, pp. 505–515, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211017495
  31. A. Subedar and W. Yates, “The disturbing youtube videos that are tricking children,” Mar 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-39381889
  32. S. Livingstone, “Developing social media literacy: How children learn to interpret risky opportunities on social network sites,” Communications, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 283–303, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2014-0113
  33. P. Wisniewski, H. Xu, M. B. Rosson, and J. M. Carroll, “Parents just don’t understand: Why teens don’t talk to parents about their online risk experiences,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, ser. CSCW ’17.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2017, p. 523–540. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998236
  34. A. Mai, L. Guelmino, K. Pfeffer, E. Weippl, and K. Krombholz, “Mental models of the internet and its online risks: Children and their parent(s),” in HCI for Cybersecurity, Privacy and Trust, A. Moallem, Ed.   Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2022, pp. 42–61.
  35. M. Wei, E. Zeng, T. Kohno, and F. Roesner, “Anti-privacy and anti-security advice on tiktok: Case studies of technology-enabled surveillance and control in intimate partner and parent-child relationships,” in Proceedings of the Eighteenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security, ser. SOUPS’22.   USA: USENIX Association, 2022.
  36. L. F. Cranor, A. L. Durity, A. Marsh, and B. Ur, “Parents’ and teens’ perspectives on privacy in a technology-filled world,” in Proceedings of the Tenth USENIX Conference on Usable Privacy and Security, ser. SOUPS ’14.   USA: USENIX Association, 2014, p. 19–35.
  37. F. Sharevski, A. Devine, P. Jachim, and E. Pieroni, ““Gettr-ing” User Insights from the Social Network Gettr,” 2022, https://truthandtrustonline.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/TTO_2022_proceedings.pdf.
  38. Tollefson, Jeff, “Disinformation researchers under investigation: what’s happening and why,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-02195-3
  39. F. Sharevski, A. Devine, E. Pieroni, and P. Jachim, “Folk Models of Misinformation On Social Media,” in Network and distributed system security symposium, 2023, https://dx.doi.org/10.14722/ndss.2023.24293.
  40. D. R. Thomas, “A General Inductive Approach for Analyzing Qualitative Evaluation Data,” American Journal of Evaluation, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 237–246, 2006.
  41. J. Cohen, “A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales,” Educational and Psychological Measurement, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 37–46, 1960.
  42. A. Rinehart, “Fake news. it’s complicated.” Sep 2022. [Online]. Available: https://firstdraftnews.org/articles/fake-news-complicated/
  43. T. Gerken, “Mrbeast and bbc stars used in deepfake scam videos,” Oct 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-66993651
  44. J. N. John, “Why generation z falls for online misinformation,” Jun 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/30/1026338/gen-z-online-misinformation/
  45. J. Andersen and S. O. Søe, “Communicative actions we live by: The problem with fact-checking, tagging or flagging fake news – the case of facebook,” European Journal of Communication, vol. 35, no. 2, pp. 126–139, 2020.
  46. U. K. Ecker, S. Lewandowsky, and D. T. Tang, “Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation,” Memory & cognition, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 1087–1100, 2010.
  47. F. Sharevski, R. Alsaadi, P. Jachim, and E. Pieroni, “Misinformation warnings: Twitter’s soft moderation effects on covid-19 vaccine belief echoes,” Computers & Security, vol. 114, p. 102577, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2021.102577.
  48. F. Sharevski, A. Devine, P. Jachim, and E. Pieroni, “Meaningful context, a red flag, or both? preferences for enhanced misinformation warnings among us twitter users,” in Proceedings of the 2022 European Symposium on Usable Security, ser. EuroUSEC ’22.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, p. 189–201, https://doi.org/10.1145/3549015.3555671.
  49. L. Benedetto and M. Ingrassia, “Digital parenting: Raising and protecting children in media world,” Parenting–Studies by an ecocultural and transactional perspective, pp. 127–148, 2020.
  50. S. Van der Linden, C. Panagopoulos, and J. Roozenbeek, “You are fake news: Political bias in perceptions of fake news,” Media, Culture & Society, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 460–470, 2020.
  51. M. Singhal, C. Ling, P. Paudel, P. Thota, N. Kumarswamy, G. Stringhini, and S. Nilizadeh, “Sok: Content moderation in social media, from guidelines to enforcement, and research to practice,” in 2023 IEEE 8th European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2023, pp. 868–895.
  52. M. Hammer, K. Scheiter, and K. Stürmer, “New technology, new role of parents: How parents’ beliefs and behavior affect students’ digital media self-efficacy,” Computers in Human Behavior, vol. 116, p. 106642, 2021.
  53. California Code, “Assembly bill 873, berman. pupil instruction: media literacy: curriculum frameworks,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB873
  54. L. Zhang-Kennedy and S. Chiasson, “A systematic review of multimedia tools for cybersecurity awareness and education,” ACM Comput. Surv., vol. 54, no. 1, jan 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3427920
  55. L. Grace and B. Hone, “Factitious: Large scale computer game to fight fake news and improve news literacy,” in Extended Abstracts of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ser. CHI EA ’19.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2019, p. 1–8. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3290607.3299046
  56. J. Roozenbeek and S. Van Der Linden, “The fake news game: actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation,” Journal of risk research, vol. 22, no. 5, pp. 570–580, 2019.
  57. R. Wash and M. M. Cooper, “Who provides phishing training? facts, stories, and people like me,” in Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ser. CHI ’18.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2018, p. 1–12. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3173574.3174066
  58. J. Pu, Z. Sarwar, S. M. Abdullah, A. Rehman, Y. Kim, P. Bhattacharya, M. Javed, and B. Viswanath, “Deepfake text detection: Limitations and opportunities,” in 2023 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 2023, pp. 1613–1630.
  59. R. Raphael, “Tiktok is flooded with health myths. these creators are pushing back.” 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/29/well/live/tiktok-misinformation.html
  60. M. Boeker and A. Urman, “An empirical investigation of personalization factors on tiktok,” in Proceedings of the ACM Web Conference 2022, ser. WWW ’22.   New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022, p. 2298–2309. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3485447.3512102
User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (2)
  1. Filipo Sharevski (31 papers)
  2. Jennifer Vander Loop (7 papers)