Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Misinformation Warning Labels: Twitter's Soft Moderation Effects on COVID-19 Vaccine Belief Echoes

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2104.00779 v1 pith:NFCUTXPP submitted 2021-04-01 cs.SI cs.CR

classification cs.SIcs.CR
keywords warningcovid-19misinformationtwittervaccinemoderationsoftaccuracy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
read the original abstract

Twitter, prompted by the rapid spread of alternative narratives, started actively warning users about the spread of COVID-19 misinformation. This form of soft moderation comes in two forms: as a warning cover before the Tweet is displayed to the user and as a warning tag below the Tweet. This study investigates how each of the soft moderation forms affects the perceived accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on Twitter. The results suggest that the warning covers work, but not the tags, in reducing the perception of accuracy of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on Twitter. "Belief echoes" do exist among Twitter users, unfettered by any warning labels, in relationship to the perceived safety and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccine as well as the vaccination hesitancy for themselves and their children. The implications of these results are discussed in the context of usable security affordances for combating misinformation on social media.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Evaluation Metrics for Misinformation Warning Interventions: Challenges and Prospects

    cs.HC 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A systematic review classifying misinformation warning evaluation metrics into behavioral, trust, usability, and cognitive/psychological categories, and highlighting standardization challenges.

Pith tools