{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02379333786539769, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0020394289598912306, 'mean_word_length': 5.752293577981652, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Effects of Warning Labels and Social Endorsement Cues on Credibility Perceptions of and Engagement Intentions with Fake News

Fake news spreading virally on social media platforms is a topic of high societal and political relevance. Therefore, platforms have been experimenting with different measures of intervention. However, research on their effectiveness is still limited and dispositional factors are often neglected. We tested two promising interventions – adding warning labels and removing social endorsement cues (i.e., likes) – while including socio-demographic and psychological dispositions based on prior research as controls. Data from an online experiment (N = 591) shows that warning labels significantly reduced credibility perceptions of a fake news post on climate change and respective amplification intentions (i.e., liking and sharing), whereas removing social endorsement cues below a post did not have an impact. Further, credibility perceptions were associated with users’ political orientation. Amplification intentions differed depending on participants’ educational level, political leaning, and analytic thinking style, whereas the willingness to elaborate more carefully about the post varied with their age, the involvement with the topic of the fake news, and their political leaning. Our findings contribute to the research required to craft effective interventions against the spread of misinformation and identify vulnerable users.