Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fake News technisch begegnen – Detektions- und Behandlungsansätze zur Unterstützung von NutzerInnen

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Wahrheit und Fake im postfaktisch-digitalen Zeitalter

Part of the book series: ars digitalis ((AD))

Zusammenfassung

Die Bedeutung des Umgangs mit Fake News hat sowohl im politischen als auch im sozialen Kontext zugenommen: Während sich bestehende Studien vor allem darauf konzentrieren, wie man gefälschte Nachrichten erkennt und kennzeichnet, fehlen Ansätze zur Unterstützung der NutzerInnen bei der eigenen Einschätzung weitgehend. Dieser Artikel stellt bestehende Black-Box- und White-Box-Ansätze vor und vergleicht Vor- und Nachteile. Dabei zeigen sich White-Box-Ansätze insbesondere als vielversprechend, um gegen Reaktanzen zu wirken, während Black-Box-Ansätze Fake News mit deutlich größerer Genauigkeit detektieren. Vorgestellt wird auch das von uns entwickelte Browser-Plugin TrustyTweet, welches die BenutzerInnen bei der Bewertung von Tweets auf Twitter unterstützt, indem es politisch neutrale und intuitive Warnungen anzeigt, ohne Reaktanz zu erzeugen.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 34.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Literatur

  • Aisch G, Huang J, Kang C (2016) Dissecting the #PizzaGate conspiracy theories. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/10/business/media/pizzagate.html. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Allcott H, Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J Econ Perspect 31(2):211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allcott H, Gentzkow M, Yu C (2019) Trends in the diffusion of misinformation on social media. Res Politics 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554

  • Berinsky AJ (2017) Rumors and health care reform: experiments in political misinformation. Br J Polit Sci 47(2):241–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123415000186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhuiyan MM, Zhang K, Vick K, Horning MA, Mitra T (2018) Feed reflect: a tool for nudging users to assess news credibility on Twitter. In: Companion of the 2018 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing – CSCW ’18, S 205–208. https://doi.org/10.1145/3272973.3274056

  • Bode L, Vraga EK (2015) In related news, that was wrong: the correction of misinformation through related stories functionality in social media. J Commun 65(4):619–638. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bourgonje P, Moreno Schneider J, Rehm G (2018) From clickbait to fake news detection: an approach based on detecting the stance of headlines to articles. In: Proceedings of the 2017 EMNLP workshop: natural language processing meets journalism, S 84–89. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w17-4215

  • Breithut J (2020) Falschinformationen im Netz: So reagieren Facebook, Google und TikTok auf das Coronavirus. Spiegel Online. https://www.spiegel.de/netzwelt/web/coronavirus-wie-facebook-google-und-tiktok-auf-falschinformationen-reagieren-a-6bc449fc-2450-4964-a675-7d6573316ad9. Zugegriffen am 03.02.2020

  • Castillo C, Mendoza M, Poblete B (2011) Information credibility on twitter. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on World Wide Web, Hyderabad, S 675–684

    Google Scholar 

  • Clayton K et al (2019) Real solutions for fake news? Measuring the effectiveness of general warnings and fact-check tags in reducing belief in false stories on social media. Polit Behav. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-019-09533-0

  • Conati C, Porayska-Pomsta K, Mavrikis M (2018) AI in education needs interpretable machine learning: lessons from open learner modelling. In: Proceedings of 2018 ICML Workshop on Human Interpretability in Machine Learning (WHI 2018). http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.00154. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

  • Dutton WH, Fernandez L (2019) How susceptible are internet users? InterMedia 46(4). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3316768

  • Ecker UKH, Lewandowsky S, Tang DTW (2010) Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation. Mem Cogn 38(8):1087–1100. https://doi.org/10.3758/MC.38.8.1087

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (2018) A multi-dimensional approach to disinformation. Report of the independent High Level Group on fake news and online disinformation (bd 2). https://doi.org/10.2759/0156.

  • Fuhr N et al (2018) An information nutritional label for online documents. ACM SIGIR Forum 51(3):46–66. https://doi.org/10.1145/3190580.3190588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granik M, Mesyura V (2017) Fake news detection using naive Bayes classifier. In: 2017 IEEE 1st Ukraine Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, UKRCON 2017 – Proceedings, S 900–903. https://doi.org/10.1109/UKRCON.2017.8100379

  • Gravanis G, Vakali A, Diamantaras K, Karadais P (2019) Behind the cues: a benchmarking study for fake news detection. Expert Syst Appl 128:201–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.03.036

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grinberg N, Joseph K, Friedland L, Swire-Thompson B, Lazer D (2019) Political science: fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science 363(6425):374–378. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta A, Kumaraguru P, Castillo C, Meier P (2014) TweetCred: real-time credibility assessment of content on Twitter. In: International conference on social informatics, S 228–243. http://arxiv.org/abs/1405.5490. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

  • Hanselowski A, Stab C, Schulz C, Li Z, Gurevych I (2019a) A richly annotated corpus for different tasks in automated fact-checking. In: Proceedings of the 23rd conference on computational natural language processing, S 493–503. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/k19-1046

  • Hanselowski A et al (2019b) UKP-Athene: multi-sentence textual entailment for claim verification. In: Proceedings of the First Workshop on Fact Extraction and Verification (FEVER), S 103–108. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w18-5516

  • Hartwig K, Reuter C (2019) TrustyTweet: an indicator-based browser-plugin to assist users in dealing with Fake News on Twitter. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI). http://www.peasec.de/paper/2019/2019_HartwigReuter_TrustyTweet_WI.pdf. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Jin Z, Cao J, Zhang Y, Luo J (2016) News verification by exBploiting conflicting social viewpoints in microblogs. In: 30th AAAI conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI 2016, Phoenix, S 2972–2978

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahne J, Bowyer B (2017) Educating for democracy in a partisan age: confronting the challenges of motivated reasoning and misinformation. Am Educ Res J 54(1):3–34. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831216679817

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaufhold M, Rupp N, Reuter C, Habdank M (2020) Mitigating information overload in social media during conflicts and crises: design and evaluation of a cross-platform alerting system. Behav Inform Technol 39(3):319–342

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly Garrett R, Weeks BE (2013) The promise and peril of real-time corrections to political misperceptions. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW, S 1047–1057. https://doi.org/10.1145/2441776.2441895

  • Kim A, Dennis A (2018) Says who?: how news presentation format influences perceived believability and the engagement level of social media users. In: Proceedings of the 51st Hawaii international conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/hicss.2018.497

  • Kirchner J, Reuter C (2020) Countering fake news: a comparison of possible solutions regarding user acceptance and effectiveness. In: Proceedings of the ACM: human computer interaction (PACM): computer-supported cooperative work and social computing, ACM, Austin, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky S, Ecker UKH, Seifert CM, Schwarz N, Cook J (2012) Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychol Sci Public Interest 13(3):106–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612451018

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long Y, Lu Q, Xiang R, Li M, Huang C-R (2017) Fake news detection through multi-perspective speaker profiles, Bd 2, 8. Aufl. In: Proceedings of the eighth international joint conference on Natural Language Processing, Taipei, S 252–256

    Google Scholar 

  • McNally M, Bose L (2018) Combating false news in the Facebook news feed: Fighting abuse @Scale. https://atscaleconference.com/events/fighting-abuse-scale/. Zugegriffen am 24.01.2020

  • Mihailidis P, Viotty S (2017) Spreadable spectacle in digital culture: civic expression, Fake News, and the role of media literacies in “post-fact” society. Am Behav Sci 61(4):441–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217701217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monti F, Frasca F, Eynard D, Mannion D, Bronstein MM (2019) Fake news detection on social media using geometric deep learning. [Preprint]

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris MR, Counts S, Roseway A, Hoff A, Schwarz J (2012) Tweeting is believing? Understanding microblog credibility perceptions. In: Proceedings of the ACM conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, CSCW, S 441–450. https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145274.

  • Mosseri A (2016) Addressing hoaxes and fake news. https://about.fb.com/news/2016/12/news-feed-fyi-addressing-hoaxes-and-fake-news/. Zugegriffen am 24.01.2020

  • Müller P, Denner N (2017) Was tun gegen „Fake News“? Friedrich Naumann Stiftung Für die Freiheit, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickerson RS (1998) Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol 2:175–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan B, Reifler J (2010) When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit Behav 32(2):303–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nyhan B, Reifler J, Ubel PA (2013) The hazards of correcting myths about health care reform. Med Care 51(2):127–132. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318279486b

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pariser E (2011) The filter bubble: how the new personalized Web is changing what we read and how we think. Penguin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennycook G, Cannon TD, Rand DG (2018) Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. J Exp Psychol Gen 147(12):1865–1880. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennycook G, Bear A, Collins E (2019) The implied truth effect: attaching warnings to a subset of fake news headlines increases perceived accuracy of headlines without warnings. In: Management Science. http://www.mnsc.2019.3478.pdf. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Pérez-Rosas V, Kleinberg B, Lefevre A, Mihal R (2017) Automatic detection of fake news. In: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Computational Linguistics. https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/C18-1287. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

  • Potthast M, Kiesel J, Reinartz K, Bevendorff J, Stein B (2018) A stylometric inquiry into hyperpartisan and fake news. In: ACL 2018 – 56th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference (Long Papers) Vol. 1, S 231–240. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/p18-1022

  • Rapoza K (2017) Can „fake news“ impact the stock market? In: Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2017/02/26/can-fake-news-impact-the-stock-market/#33dc99c02fac. Zugegriffen am 24.01.2020

  • Rashkin H, Choi E, Jang JY, Volkova S, Choi Y (2017) Truth of varying shades: analyzing language in fake news and political fact-checking. In: EMNLP 2017 – conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Proceedings, S 2931–2937. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/d17-1317

  • Reis JCS, Correia A, Murai F, Veloso A, Benevenuto F (2019) Explainable machine learning for fake news detection. In: WebSci 2019 – Proceedings of the 11th ACM conference on Web Science, S 17–26. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3292522.3326027

  • Reuter C, Hartwig K, Kirchner J, Schlegel N (2019) Fake news perception in Germany: a representative study of people’s attitudes and approaches to counteract disinformation. In: Proceedings of the international conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik. http://www.peasec.de/paper/2019/2019_ReuterHartwigKirchnerSchlegel_FakeNewsPerceptionGermany_WI.pdf. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Ribeiro MT, Singh S, Guestrin C (2016) „Why should i trust you?“ Explaining the predictions of any classifier. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, S 1135–1144. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939778

  • Ruchansky N, Seo S, Liu Y (2017) CSI: a hybrid deep model for fake news detection. In: International conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, S 797–806. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3132847.3132877

  • Sally Chan M, Jones CR, Hall Jamieson K, Albarraci D (2017) Debunking: a meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation. Psychol Sci 28(11):1531–1546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617714579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sängerlaub A (2017) Verzerrte Realitäten – Die Wahrnehmung von „Fake News“ im Schatten der USA und der Bundestagswahl. Stiftung Neue Verantwortung, Berlin. https://www.stiftung-nv.de/sites/default/files/fake_news_im_schatten_der_usa_und_der_bundestagswahl.pdf. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Sethi RJ (2017) Crowdsourcing the verification of fake news and alternative facts. In: HT 2017 – proceedings of the 28th ACM conference on Hypertext and Social Media, S 315–316. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3078714.3078746

  • Shu K, Bernard HR, Liu H (2019a) Studying fake news via network analysis: detection and mitigation. In: Emerging research challenges and opportunities in computational social network analysis and mining, S 43–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-94105-9_3

  • Shu K, Wang S, Liu H (2019b) Beyond news contents: the role of social context for fake news detection. In: WSDM 2019 – proceedings of the 12th ACM international conference on Web Search and Data Mining, S 312–320. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3289600.3290994

  • Stanoevska-slabeva K (2017) Teaching social media literacy with storytelling and social media curation. In: Twenty-third Americas conference on Information Systems, S 1. https://aisel.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1524&context=amcis2017. Zugegriffen am 18.04.2020

  • Steinebach M, Bader K, Rinsdorf L, Krämer N, Roßnagel A (2020) Desinformation aufdecken und bekämpfen: Interdisziplinäre Ansätze gegen Desinformationskampagnen und für Meinungspluralität, Bd 45, 1. Aufl. Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, Baden-Baden. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783748904816

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Tacchini E, Ballarin G, Della Vedova ML, Moret S, de Alfaro L (2017) Some like it Hoax: automated fake news detection in social networks. In: CEUR Workshop Proceedings (Vol. 1960). https://developers.facebook.com/docs/graph-api. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

  • Tene O, Polonetsky J, Sadeghi A-R (2018) Five freedoms for the momo deus. IEEE Secur Priv 16(3): 15–17. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/8395137/. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

  • Vosoughi S, Roy D, Aral S (2018) The spread of true and false news online. Science 359:1146–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanas N, El-Saban M, Ashour H, Ammar W (2008) Automatic scoring of online discussion posts. In: International conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, S 19–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/1458527.1458534

  • Weerkamp W, De Rijke M (2008) Credibility improves topical blog post retrieval. In: ACL-08: HLT – 46th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Proceedings of the Conference, Columbus, S 923–931

    Google Scholar 

  • Weimer M, Gurevych I, Mühlhäuser M (2007) Automatically assessing the post quality in online discussions on software. In: Proceedings of the 45th annual meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics Companion Volume Proceedings of the Demo and Poster Sessions, S 125–128. Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.3115/1557769.1557806

  • Wu L, Liu H (2018) Tracing fake-news footprints: characterizing social media messages by how they propagate. In: WSDM 2018 – proceedings of the 11th ACM international conference on Web Search and Data Mining, S 637–645. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3159652.3159677

  • Yang F et al (2019) XFake: explainable fake news detector with visualizations. In: The Web Conference 2019 – proceedings of the World Wide Web Conference, WWW 2019, S 3600–3604. Association for Computing Machinery, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1145/3308558.3314119

  • Zhang X, Ghorbani AA (2020) An overview of online fake news: characterization, detection, and discussion. Inf Process Manag 57(2):102025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2019.03.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhou X, Jain A, Phoha VV, Zafarani R (2019) Fake news early detection: a theory-driven model. Digit Threats Res Pract. http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.11679. Zugegriffen am 22.04.2021

Download references

Danksagung

Gefördert durch die Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) – SFB 1119 – 236615297 (CROSSING) sowie vom Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) und vom Hessischen Ministerium für Wissenschaft und Kunst (HMWK) im Rahmen ihrer gemeinsamen Förderung für das Nationale Forschungszentrum für angewandte Cybersicherheit ATHENE.

Dieser Artikel basiert in Teilen auf dem Artikel „Fake News Perception in Germany: A Representative Study of People’s Attitudes and Approaches to Counteract Disinformation“ (Reuter et al. 2019) sowie „TrustyTweet: An Indicator-based Browser-Plugin to Assist Users in Dealing with Fake News on Twitter“ (Hartwig und Reuter 2019). Überdies basiert er in Teilen auf dem Konferenzbeitrag „Countering Fake News: A Comparison of Possible Solutions Regarding User Acceptance and Effectiveness“ (Kirchner und Reuter 2020). Wir bedanken uns bei Jan Kirchner für seine Unterstützung.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lehrstuhl Wissenschaft und Technik für Frieden und Sicherheit, Technische Universität Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Deutschland

    Katrin Hartwig & Christian Reuter

Authors
  1. Katrin Hartwig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Reuter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Katrin Hartwig .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Journalism and Social Communication, University of Wroclaw, Breslau, Poland

    Peter Klimczak

  2. Inst. f. Phil. und Sozialwissenschaften, Brandenburgische Technische Universität, Cottbus, Deutschland

    Thomas Zoglauer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hartwig, K., Reuter, C. (2021). Fake News technisch begegnen – Detektions- und Behandlungsansätze zur Unterstützung von NutzerInnen. In: Klimczak, P., Zoglauer, T. (eds) Wahrheit und Fake im postfaktisch-digitalen Zeitalter. ars digitalis. Springer Vieweg, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-32957-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation