Skip to content
Evidence Base

Orig. title: Hur motiverar gymnasieelever sina bedömningar av trovärdiga och vilseledande digitala nyheter?

Engl. transl.: On what grounds do upper secondary school students judge digital news to be trustworthy or misleading?

Publication details

Year: 2020
Issued: 2020
Language: Swedish
Issue: 2
Start Page: 153
End Page: 178
Editors:
Authors: Nygren T.; Wiksten Folkeryd J.; Liberg C.; Guath M.
Type: Journal article
Journal: Nordidactica: Journal of Humanities and Social Science Education
Publisher: Centre for Social Science Education, Karlstad University
Place: Karlstad
Topics: Learning; Literacy and skills
Implications For Educators About: Digital citizenship
Implications For Stakeholders About: Researchers

Abstract

In this study, we investigate how ca. 400 students, age 16-19, determine the trustworthiness of false, biased and credible news. We examine their justifications of their assessments of the credibility with regard to the source (who?), the content (what?), the design (how?) and the underlying purposes (why?). We find that students’ patterns of justifications can be linked to different assessments. For example, students finding junk news credible may have special problems separating different kinds of sources. Students who fail to debunk a manipulated image often rely on what they see in the image in contrast to students who determine credibility upon what is not in the image. We also find that testitems used in previous research can be linked to aspects of civic online reasoning not identified in previous research. We identify complex potentials and pitfalls among students important for education and further research.

Outcome

[S]tudents’ patterns of justifications can be linked to different assessments. For example, students finding junk news credible may have special problems separating different kinds of sources. Students who fail to debunk a manipulated image often rely on what they see in the image in contrast to students who determine credibility upon what is not in the image. We also find that test items used in previous research can be linked to aspects of civic online reasoning not identified in previous research." (Authors, abstract)

Related studies

All results