skip to main content
research-article

Trustworthiness Perceptions of Social Media Resources Named after a Crisis Event

Published:29 May 2020Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

People often create social media accounts and pages named after crisis events. We call such accounts and pages Crisis Named Resources (CNRs). CNRs share information about crisis events and are followed by many. Yet, they also appear suddenly (at crisis onset) and in most cases, the owners are unknown. Thus, it can be challenging for audiences in particular to know whether to trust (or not trust) these CNRs and the information they provide. In this study, we conducted surveys and interviews with members of the public and experts in crisis informatics, emergency response, and communication studies to evaluate the trustworthiness of CNRs named after the 2017 Hurricane Irma. Findings showed that participants evaluated trustworthiness based on their perceptions of a CNR's content, information source, profile, and owner. Findings also show that if people perceive that a CNR owner has prior experience in crisis response, can help the public to respond to the event, understands the situation, has the best interests of affected individuals in mind, or will correct misinformation, they tend to trust that CNR. Participant demographics and expertise showed no effect on perceptions of trustworthiness.

References

  1. A Al-Akkad, A Zimmermann, S Birlinghoven, and S Augustin. 2012. Survey: ICT-supported public participation in disasters. 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Hunt Allcott and Matthew Gentzkow. 2017. Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of economic perspectives 31, 2: 211--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Curt Anderson and Claire Galofaro. 2017. Irma bears down on Florida; more than 5M told to flee coast. ABC News. Retrieved September 17, 2017 from http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/hurricane-warnings-add-urgency-florida-evacuations-49696526.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Isabel Anger and Christian Kittl. 2011. Measuring influence on Twitter. 11th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Technologies, ACM, 31.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Yakov Bart, Venkatesh Shankar, Fareena Sultan, and Glen L. Urban. 2005. Are the Drivers and Role of Online Trust the Same for All Web Sites and Consumers? A Large-Scale Exploratory Empirical Study. Journal of Marketing 69, 4: 133--152.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Ardion Beldad, Menno De Jong, and Michaël Steehouder. 2010. How shall I trust the faceless and the intangible? A literature review on the antecedents of online trust. Computers in Human Behavior 26, 5: 857--869.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Hugh Beyer and Karen Holtzblatt. 1997. Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Axel Bruns and Jean Burgess. 2014. Crisis communication in natural disasters: The Queensland floods and Christchurch earthquakes. In Twitter and society. Peter Lang, 373--384.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Axel Bruns, Jean Burgess, Kate Crawford, and Frances Shaw. 2012. #qldfloods and @QPSMedia: Crisis Communication on Twitter in the 2011 South East Queensland Floods. Brisbane: ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Apoorva Chauhan and Amanda L. Hughes. 2017. Providing Online Crisis Information: An Analysis of Official Sources during the 2014 Carlton Complex Wildfire. ACM, 3151--3162.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Apoorva Chauhan and Amanda L. Hughes. 2018. Social Media Resources Named after a Crisis Event. 15th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, 573--583.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Son Doan, Bao-Khanh Ho Vo, and Nigel Collier. 2011. An analysis of Twitter messages in the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake. Springer, 58--66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Neil Dufty. 2012. Using social media to build community disaster resilience. Australian Journal of Emergency Management, The 27, 1: 40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Tristan Endsley, Yu Wu, and James Reep. 2014. The source of the story: Evaluating the credibility of crisis information sources. Proceedings of the 11th International ISCRAM Conference.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Facebook. What is the Page Transparency section on Facebook Pages? Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/www/323314944866264?helpref=platform_switcher&rdrhc.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. FEMA. 2020. Coronavirus Rumor Control. FEMA. Retrieved from https://www.fema.gov/coronavirus-rumor-control.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Martin Flintham, Christian Karner, Khaled Bachour, Helen Creswick, Neha Gupta, and Stuart Moran. 2018. Falling for fake news: investigating the consumption of news via social media. ACM, 376.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Aditi Gupta, Hemank Lamba, Ponnurangam Kumaraguru, and Anupam Joshi. 2013. Faking sandy: characterizing and identifying fake images on twitter during hurricane sandy. ACM, 729--736.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Christine Hagar. 2010. Whom do you trust? Information seeking during the UK foot and mouth crisis. Library & Archival Security 23, 1: 3--18.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Christine Hagar. 2013. Crisis informatics: Perspectives of trust--is social media a mixed blessing? School of Information Student Research Journal 2, 2: 2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. J. Brian Houston, Joshua Hawthorne, Mildred F. Perreault, et al. 2015. Social media and disasters: a functional framework for social media use in disaster planning, response, and research. 39, 1: 1--22.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Y. Linlin Huang, Kate Starbird, Mania Orand, Stephanie A. Stanek, and Heather T. Pedersen. 2015. Connected Through Crisis: Emotional Proximity and the Spread of Misinformation Online. Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, ACM, 969--980.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Amanda Lee Hughes and Apoorva Chauhan. 2015. Online media as a means to affect public trust in emergency responders. International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Laddawan Kaewkitipong, Charlie Chen, and Peter Ractham. 2012. Lessons Learned from the use of Social Media in Combating a Crisis: A Case Study of 2011 Thailand Flooding Disaster. Thirty Third International Conference on Information Systems, 17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Sebastian Kettley. 2017. Hurricane Irma damage in pictures: Barbuda, St Barts and St Martin WRECKED. Sunday Express. Retrieved September 17, 2017 from http://www.express.co.uk/news/weather/850732/Hurricane-Irma-damage-pictures-Caribbean-photos-storm-floods-photographs.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Mark Latonero and Irina Shklovski. 2011. Emergency Management, Twitter, and Social Media Evangelism. International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (IJISCRAM) 3, 4: 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Fang Liu, Andrew Burton-Jones, and Dongming Xu. 2014. Rumors on Social Media in disasters: Extending Transmission to Retransmission. 49.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Sophia B. Liu, Leysia Palen, Jeannette Sutton, Amanda L. Hughes, and Sarah Vieweg. 2008. In Search of the Bigger Picture: The Emergent Role of On-Line Photo Sharing in Times of Disaster. International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management, 140--149.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Yang Liu and Yi-Fang Brook Wu. 2018. Early detection of fake news on social media through propagation path classification with recurrent and convolutional networks.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Jing Ma, Wei Gao, Prasenjit Mitra, et al. 2016. Detecting rumors from microblogs with recurrent neural networks. Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 3818--3824.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Jing Ma, Wei Gao, Zhongyu Wei, Yueming Lu, and Kam-Fai Wong. 2015. Detect rumors using time series of social context information on microblogging websites. ACM, 1751--1754.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Xiao Ma, Jeffery T. Hancock, Kenneth Lim Mingjie, and Mor Naaman. 2017. Self-Disclosure and Perceived Trustworthiness of Airbnb Host Profiles. ACM Press, 2397--2409.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Roger C. Mayer, James H. Davis, and F. David Schoorman. 1995. An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of management review 20, 3: 709--734.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Marcelo Mendoza, Barbara Poblete, and Carlos Castillo. 2010. Twitter under crisis: Can we trust what we RT? ACM, 71--79.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Milad Mirbabaie and Sina Youn. 2018. Exploring sense-making activities in crisis situations.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Meredith Ringel Morris, Scott Counts, Asta Roseway, Aaron Hoff, and Julia Schwarz. 2012. Tweeting is believing?: understanding microblog credibility perceptions. ACM, 441--450.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Adam Mosseri. 2016. Addressing Hoaxes and Fake News.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Leysia Palen and Kenneth M. Anderson. 2016. Crisis informatics-New data for extraordinary times. Science 353, 6296: 224--225.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Leysia Palen and Amanda L. Hughes. 2018. Social Media in Disaster Communication. In Handbook of Disaster Research. Springer, Cham, 497--518.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. L. Pee and J. Lee. 2016. Trust in User-Generated Information on Social Media during Crises: An Elaboration Likelihood Perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Information Systems 26, 1: 1--22.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Lily Puckett. 2019. Twitter buys tech start-up that claims to quickly spot fake news. Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/twitter-fake-news-fabula-ai-misinformation-machine-learning-a8942091.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Christian Reuter, Amanda Lee Hughes, and Marc-André Kaufhold. 2018. Social Media in Crisis Management: An Evaluation and Analysis of Crisis Informatics Research. International Journal of Human--Computer Interaction 34, 4: 280--294.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Timothy Sellnow, Matthew Seeger, and Robert Ulmer. 2002. Chaos theory, informational needs, and natural disasters. Journal of Applied Communication Research 30, 4: 269--292.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Eunsoo Seo, Prasant Mohapatra, and Tarek Abdelzaher. 2012. Identifying rumors and their sources in social networks. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 83891I.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Venkatesh Shankar, Glen L. Urban, and Fareena Sultan. 2002. Online trust: a stakeholder perspective, concepts, implications, and future directions. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems 11, 3--4: 325--344.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Kai Shu, Amy Sliva, Suhang Wang, Jiliang Tang, and Huan Liu. 2017. Fake news detection on social media: A data mining perspective. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 19, 1: 22--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Amber Silver and Lindsay Matthews. 2017. The use of Facebook for information seeking, decision support, and self-organization following a significant disaster. Information, Communication & Society 20, 11: 1680--1697.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  48. Craig Silverman and Jeremy Singer-Vine. 2016. Most Americans who see fake news believe it, new survey says. BuzzFeed News 6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Tomer Simon, Avishay Goldberg, Limor Aharonson-Daniel, Dmitry Leykin, and Bruria Adini. 2014. Twitter in the cross fire-the use of social media in the Westgate Mall terror attack in Kenya. PloS one 9, 8: e104136.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Kate Starbird, Dharma Dailey, Owla Mohamed, Gina Lee, and Emma S Spiro. 2018. Engage Early, Correct More: How Journalists Participate in False Rumors Online during Crisis Events. ACM, 105.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Kate Starbird, Jim Maddock, Mania Orand, Peg Achterman, and Robert M. Mason. 2014. Rumors, False Flags, and Digital Vigilantes: Misinformation on Twitter after the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombing. IConference 2014, 654--662.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Kate Starbird, Emma Spiro, Isabelle Edwards, Kaitlyn Zhou, Jim Maddock, and Sindhuja Narasimhan. 2016. Could This Be True?: I Think So! Expressed Uncertainty in Online Rumoring. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 360--371.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  53. Stefan Stieglitz, Milad Mirbabaie, Lara Schwenner, Julian Marx, Janina Lehr, and Felix Brünker. 2017. Sensemaking and communication roles in social media crisis communication.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Andrea H Tapia, Amanda Lee Hughes, and Nicolas J LaLone. 2018. The Verification Pause: When Information Access Slows Reaction to Crisis Events. International Journal of Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (IJISCRAM) 10, 3: 1--19.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Glen L. Urban, Cinda Amyx, and Antonio Lorenzon. 2009. Online Trust: State of the Art, New Frontiers, and Research Potential. Journal of Interactive Marketing 23, 2: 179--190.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Sarah Vieweg, Amanda L Hughes, Kate Starbird, and Leysia Palen. 2010. Microblogging during two natural hazards events: what twitter may contribute to situational awareness. ACM, 1079--1088.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Orla Vigsø and Tomas Odén. 2016. The dynamics of sensemaking and information seeking in a crisis situation. Nordicom Review 37, 1: 71--84.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  58. Karl E Weick. 1988. Enacted sensemaking in crisis situations. Journal of management studies 25, 4: 305--317.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  59. Li Zeng, Kate Starbird, and Emma S. Spiro. 2016. Rumors at the Speed of Light? Modeling the Rate of Rumor Transmission During Crisis. 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), IEEE, 1969--1978.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Trustworthiness Perceptions of Social Media Resources Named after a Crisis Event

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
      Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 4, Issue CSCW1
      CSCW
      May 2020
      1285 pages
      EISSN:2573-0142
      DOI:10.1145/3403424
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2020 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 29 May 2020
      • Online AM: 7 May 2020
      Published in pacmhci Volume 4, Issue CSCW1

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader