In the era of digital communication, misinformation on social media threatens the foundational trust in these platforms. While myriad measures have been implemented to counteract misinformation, the complex relationship between these interventions and the multifaceted dynamics of trust and distrust on social media remains underexplored. To bridge this gap, we surveyed 1,769 participants in the U.S. to gauge their trust and distrust in social media and examine their experiences with anti-misinformation features. Our research demonstrates how trust and distrust in social media are not simply two ends of a spectrum; but can also co-exist, enriching the theoretical understanding of these constructs. Furthermore, participants exhibited varying patterns of trust and distrust across demographic characteristics and platforms. Our results also show that current misinformation interventions helped heighten awareness of misinformation and bolstered trust in social media, but did not alleviate underlying distrust. We discuss theoretical and practical implications for future research.

Do people trust social media? If so, why, in what contexts, and how does that trust impact their lives? Researchers, companies, and journalists alike have increasingly investigated these questions, which are fundamental to understanding social media interactions and their implications for society. However, trust in social media is a complex concept, and there is conflicting evidence about the antecedents and implications of trusting social media content, users, and platforms. More problematic is that we lack basic agreement as to what trust means in the context of social media. Addressing these challenges, we conducted a systematic review to identify themes and challenges in this field. Through our analysis of 70 papers, we contribute a synthesis of how trust in social media is defined, conceptualized, and measured, a summary of trust antecedents in social media, an understanding of how trust in social media impacts behaviors and attitudes, and directions for future work.

Abstract We stumble upon new and repeating information daily. As information comes from many sources, social media continues to play a predominant role in disseminating information, ultimately impacting individuals’ perceptions and behaviors. A prime example of this impact was observed during the COVID-19 pandemic, in which social media use was influencing willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine. While studies on this relationship between social media use and vaccination intent have been widely investigated, less is known about the mechanisms that link these two variables, specifically the types of information seen on social media platforms and the effects of these different types of information. In this exploratory study, we demonstrate the mediator role of information exposure (to include both types of information and frequency) between social media use and vaccination intent. Our results show that different types of information mediate this relationship differently and demonstrate how these relationships were further moderated by the income level of the participant. We conclude with the implications of these findings and how our findings can inform the direction of future research within the field of human–computer interaction.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of data visualizations were created to inform the public about the rapidly evolving crisis. Data dashboards, a form of information dissemination used during the pandemic, have facilitated this process by visualizing statistics regarding the number of COVID-19 cases over time. Prior work on COVID-19 visualizations has primarily focused on the design and evaluation of specific visualization systems from technology-centered perspectives. However, little is known about what occurs behind the scenes during the visualization creation processes, given the complex sociotechnical contexts in which they are embedded. Yet, such ecological knowledge is necessary to help characterize the nuances and trajectories of visualization design practices in the wild, as well as generate insights into how creators come to understand and approach visualization design on their own terms and for their own situated purposes. In this research, we conducted a qualitative interview study among dashboard creators from federal agencies, state health departments, mainstream news media outlets, and other organizations that created (often widely-used) COVID-19 dashboards to answer the following questions: how did visualization creators engage in COVID-19 dashboard design, and what tensions, conflicts, and challenges arose during this process? Our findings detail the trajectory of design practices-from creation to expansion, maintenance, and termination-that are shaped by the complex interplay between design goals, tools and technologies, labor, emerging crisis contexts, and public engagement. We particularly examined the tensions between designers and the general public involved in these processes. These conflicts, which often materialized due to a divergence between public demands and standing policies, centered around the type and amount of information to be visualized, how public perceptions shape and are shaped by visualization design, and the strategies utilized to deal with (potential) misinterpretations and misuse of visualizations. Our findings and lessons learned shed light on new ways of thinking in visualization design, focusing on the bundled activities that are invariably involved in human and nonhuman participation throughout the entire trajectory of design practice.

During crises like COVID-19, individuals are inundated with conflicting and time-sensitive information that drives a need for rapid assessment of the trustworthiness and reliability of information sources and platforms. This parallels evolutions in information infrastructures, ranging from social media to government data platforms. Distinct from current literature, which presumes a static relationship between the presence or absence of trust and people’s behaviors, our mixed-methods research focuses on situated trust, or trust that is shaped by people’s information-seeking and assessment practices through emerging information platforms (e.g., social media, crowdsourced systems, COVID data platforms). Our findings characterize the shifts in trustee (what/who people trust) from information on social media to the social media platform(s), how distrust manifests skepticism in issues of data discrepancy, the insufficient presentation of uncertainty, and how this trust and distrust shift over time. We highlight the deep challenges in existing information infrastructures that influence trust and distrust formation.