Keywords
News update
Grammatical Errors in journalism
Credibility
Health journalism
How to Cite
Abstract
ABSTRACT - This article analyzes the effect of news reports containing grammatical errors that have been corrected or updated, how readers perceive the credibility of this information, and their behavioral intention with the content in the news reports. We investigated these effects in a report on yellow fever vaccination with a sample of 1.648 individuals. Based on an experimental research design, we measured the effects of the vehicle (G1 or WhatsApp) and five versions of a text. The findings show that the same text assigned to G1 or a WhatsApp message was perceived as more credible in the first case. Grammatical errors, updates, and corrections, in general, did not affect the credibility of the news or the intention to be vaccinated. When the news is attributed to the G1, however, the credibility of the “corrected” message is significantly higher than the credibility of the message with serious grammar errors.
RESUMO – Este artigo analisa o efeito de notícias com erros gramaticais, corrigidas ou atualizadas sobre a percepção de leitoras e leitores em relação à credibilidade da informação e sobre sua intenção de comportamento associada ao conteúdo dessa notícia. Investigamos esses efeitos em uma notícia sobre a vacinação contra a febre amarela junto a uma amostra de 1.648 indivíduos. Com base num desenho experimental, mensuramos os efeitos do veículo (G1 ou WhatsApp) e de cinco versões de um texto. Os achados mostram que o mesmo texto atribuído ao G1 ou a uma mensagem de WhatsApp foi percebido como mais credível no primeiro caso. Erros gramaticais, atualizações e correções em geral não afetaram a credibilidade da notícia nem a intenção de vacinação das participantes. Quando a notícia é atribuída ao G1, porém, a credibilidade da mensagem “corrigida” é significativamente maior que a credibilidade da mensagem com erros graves de gramática.
RESUMEN – Este artículo analiza el efecto de noticias con errores gramaticales, corregidas o actualizadas sobre la percepción de las lectoras y de los lectores con relación con la credibilidad de la información y sobre su intención de comportamiento asociada al contenido de esa noticia. Investigamos esos efectos en una nota sobre la vacunación contra la fiebre amarilla con una muestra de 1.648 individuos. A partir de un diseño experimental, medimos los efectos del medio (G1 o WhatsApp) y de cinco versiones de un texto. Los hallazgos muestran que el mismo texto asociado a G1 o a un mensaje de WhatsApp se percibió como más creíble en el primer caso. Los errores gramaticales, actualizaciones y correcciones generalmente no afectaron la credibilidad de la noticia ni la intención de vacunación. Cuando la noticia se atribuye al G1, todavía, la credibilidad del mensaje “corregido” es significativamente mayor que la credibilidad del mensaje con graves errores gramaticales.
References
Anikina, M. (2015). Ideals and values of modern journalists: The search for balance. In G. Nygren & B. Dobek-Ostrowska (Eds.), Journalism in change: Journalistic cultures in Poland, Russia and Sweden (pp. 153–178). Peter Lang.
Appelman, A., & Bolls, P. (2011). Article recall, credibility lower with grammar errors. Newspaper Research Journal, 32(2), 50–62. DOI: 10.1177/073953291103200205
Appelman, A., & Sundar, S. (2015). Measuring Message Credibility: Construction and Validation of an Exclusive Scale. Journalism & Mass Communication Quartely, 93(1), 59–79. DOI: 10.1177/1077699015606057
Appelman, A., & Hettinga, K. (2015). Do news corrections affect credibility? Not necessarily. Newspaper Research Journal 2015, 36(4), 415–425. DOI: 10.1177/0739532915618403
Appelman, A., & Schmierbach, M. (2017). Make no mistake? Exploring cognitive and perceptual effects of grammatical errors in news articles. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95(4), 1–18. DOI: 10.1177/1077699017736040
Appelman, A., & Hettinga, K. (2020). Correcting online content: The influence of news outlet reputation. Journalism Practice, 15(10), 1562–1579. DOI: 10.1080/17512786.2020.1784776
Batterink, L., & Neville, H. J. (2013). The human brain processes syntax in the absence of conscious awareness. Journal of Neuroscience, 33(19), 8528–8533. DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0618-13.2013.
Beed, O., & Mulnix, M. (2017). Grammar, spelling error rates persist in digital news. Newspaper Research Journal, 38(3), 316–327. DOI: 10.1177/0739532917722766
Carter, R.F., & Greenberg, B.S. (1965). Newspapers or Television: Which Do You Believe? Journalism Quartely, 42(1), 29–34. DOI: 10.1177/107769906504200104
Castillo, C., Mendoza, M., & Poblete, B. (2013). Predicting information credibility in time-sensitive social media. Internet Research, 23(5), 560–588. DOI: 10.1108/IntR-05-2012-0095
Chung, C., Nam, Y., & Stefanone, M. (2012). Exploring online news credibility: The relative influence of traditional and technological factors. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17(2), 171–186. DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01565
Cunha, M. S., Faria, N. R., Caleiro, G. S., Candido, D. S., Hill, S. C., Claro, I. M., Costa, A. C., Nogueira, J. S., Maeda, A. Y., Silva, F. G., Souza, R. P., Spinola, R., Tubaki, R. M., Menezes, R. M. T., Abade, L., Mucci, L. F., Timenetsky, M. C. S., Sabino, E. (2020). Genomic evidence of yellow fever virus in Aedes scapularis, southeastern Brazil, 2016. Acta Tropica, (205), 1–3. DOI: 10.1016/j.actatropica.2020.105390
Dochterman, M., & Stamp, G. (2010). Part 1: The determination of web credibility: A thematic analysis of web user’s judgments. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 11(1), 37–43. DOI: 10.1080/17459430903514791
Druckman, J. N., & Leeper, T. J. (2012). Learning More from Political Communication Experiments: Pretreatment and Its Effects. American Journal of Political Science, 56(4), 875–896. DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-5907.2012.00582.x
Gaziano, C., & McGrath, K. (1986). Measuring the concept of credibility. Journalism Quarterly, 63(3), 451–462 DOI: 10.1177/107769908606300301
Google. (n.d.). Mitos e fatos sobre o combate à desinformação no Google. Retrieved from: https://events.withgoogle.com/mitos-e-fatos-sobre-desinformacao-no-google/#content
Hettinga, K., & Appelman, A. (2014). Corrections of Newspaper Errors Have Little Impact. Newspaper. Research Journal, 35(1), 51–63. DOI: 10.1177/073953291403500105
Hettinga, K. E., & Appelman, A. (2016). Repeating Error Lowers Perception of Correction’s Importance. Newspaper Research Journal, 37(3), 249–260. DOI: 10.1177/0739532916664376
Hindman, M. (2009). The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton University Press.
Hovland, C., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15(4), 635–650. DOI: 10.1086/266350
Hu, Y., & Sundar, S. S. (2010). Effects of Online Health Sources on Credibility and Behavioral Intentions. Communication Research, 37(1), 105–132. DOI: 10.1177/0093650209351512
Jorge, T. M (2013). Mutação no jornalismo: Como a notícia chega à internet. Editora Universidade de Brasília.
Kang, M., & Yang, S. (2011, May, 25). Measuring social media credibility: A study on a measure of blog credibility [paper presentation]. 61st annual conference of the International Communication Association, Boston (MA).
Karlsson, M., Clerwall, C., & Nord, L. (2016). Do not stand corrected: Transparency and users’ attitudes to inaccurate news and corrections in online journalism. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94(1), 148–167. DOI: 10.1177/1077699016654680
Manual da Redação. (2018). As normas de escrita e conduta do principal jornal do país [21ª ed.]. Editora Publifolha.
Martins Filho, E. L. (1997). Manual de Redação e Estilo do Estado de S. Paulo. Editora Moderna.
Mayo, J., & Leshner, G. (2000). Assessing the credibility of computer-assisted reporting. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(4), 68–82. DOI: 10.1177/073953290002100405
McDermott, R. (2002). Experimental methods in political science. Annual Review of Political Science, 5(1), 31–61. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.polisci.5.091001.170657
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., Eyal, K., Lemus, D., & Mccann, R. (2003). Credibility for the 21st century: Integrating perspectives on source, message, and media credibility in the contemporary media environment. Communication Yearbook, 27(1), 293–335. DOI: 10.1080/23808985.2003.11679029
Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413–439. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2010.01488.x
Microsoft. (2017, September 14). Bing adds Fact Check label in SERP to support the ClaimReview markup. Microsoft Bing Blogs. Retrieved from: https://blogs.bing.com/Webmaster-Blog/September-2017/Bing-adds-Fact-Check-label-in-SERP-to-support-the-ClaimReview-markup
Moretzohn, S. (2002). Jornalismo em “tempo real”: O fetiche da velocidade. Editora Revan.
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, (32), 303–330. DOI: 10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2
Rubin, S. (1982). Performance Appraisal: a Guide to Better Supervisor Evaluation Processes[Panel Resource Paper No. 7]. Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED260634
Sacramento, I., & Paiva, R. (2020). Fake news, WhatsApp e a vacinação contra febre amarela no Brasil. MATRIZes, 14(1), 79–106. DOI: 10.11606/issn.1982-8160.v14i1p79-106
Secretaria de Comunicação (2017). Pesquisa Brasileira de Mídia 2016: Hábitos de Consumo de Mídia pela População Brasileira. Presidência da República. Retrieved from: https://www.abap.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/pesquisa-brasileira-de-midia-2016.pdf
Vieira, L., & Christofoletti, R. (2014). Reflexões sobre o erro jornalístico em quatro portais noticiosos de referência. Verso e Reverso, 28(69), 90–100. DOI: 10.4013/ver.2014.28.68.04
Vilarins, L., Stabile, M., von Bülow, M., Moura, T., Arns, A., Gomes, A., Fontenelle, A., & Franco, B. (2021). Google e as eleições brasileiras de 2018. In L. Avritzer & P.D. Carvalho (Eds.) Crises na democracia: Legitimidade, participação e inclusão (pp. 341-368). Arraes Editores.
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2018). Thinking about ‘information disorder’: formats of misinformation, disinformation, and mal-information. In C. Ireton & J. Posetti (Eds.), Journalism, ‘fake news’& disinformation (pp. 43–54). UNESCO.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Brazilian journalism research