Prior research has suggested that corrective fact-checking has inconsistent effects on beliefs about online misinformation claims. This study attempts to explain this inconsistency using three contingent factors—claim-source credibility, fact-checker credibility, and attitude strength—which respectively relate to three key parties in the fact-checking process: the source of a misleading claim, the fact-checker, and the user evaluating the fact-check. I hypothesize the interplay between these factors, which is tested using two online experiments on COVID-19-related misinformation with over 900 participants. Multilevel analysis of pretest-posttest, repeated measures data supports the hypothesized moderating effects and offers additional insights about how these effects vary between earlier versus later phases of misinformation cycles. The paper concludes with a discussion of contributions to research and practice.

中文翻译：

---

事实核查能否影响用户对错误信息主张的信念：对偶然效应的检验

先前的研究表明，纠正性事实核查对网上错误信息主张的信念具有不一致的影响。本研究试图用三个偶然因素——声明来源可信度、事实核查者可信度和态度强度——来解释这种不一致，这三个因素分别与事实核查过程中的三个关键方相关：误导性声明的来源、事实核查者的态度。检查者和评估事实检查的用户。我假设了这些因素之间的相互作用，并通过两项针对 COVID-19 相关错误信息的在线实验对 900 多名参与者进行了测试。对前后测试、重复测量数据的多级分析支持了假设的调节效应，并提供了关于这些效应在错误信息周期的早期阶段和后期阶段之间如何变化的额外见解。本文最后讨论了对研究和实践的贡献。