Search results

PurposeSocial media rumor combating is a global concern in academia and industry. Existing studies lack a clear definition and overall conceptual framework of users' rumor-combating behaviors. Therefore, this study attempts to empirically derive a typology of rumor-combating behaviors of social media users.Design/methodology/approachA three-phase typology development approach is adopted, including content analysis, multidimensional scaling (MDS), interpreting and labeling. Qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods are employed.FindingsThe elicited 40 rumor-combating behaviors vary along two dimensions: high versus low difficulty of realization, and low versus high cognitive load. Based on the two dimensions, the 40 behaviors are further divided into four categories: rumor-questioning behavior, rumor-debunking behavior, proactive-appealing behavior, and literacy enhancement behavior.Practical implicationsThis typology will serve as reference for social media platforms and governments to further explore the interventions to encourage social media users to counter rumor spreading based on various situations and different characteristics of rumor-combating behaviors.Originality/valueThis study provides a typology of rumor-combating behaviors from a novel perspective of user participation. The typology delves into the conceptual connotations and basic forms of rumor combating, allowing for a comprehensive understanding of the complete spectrum of users' rumor-combating behaviors. Furthermore, the typology identifies the similarities and the differences between various rumor-combating behaviors, thus providing implications and directions for future research on rumor-combating behaviors.

Based on immersive participatory observation of the curatorial practice of the 2019 OCAT exhibition Rural Construction through Art in Shenzhen, we identified two modes of community-based artistic interventions: a cultural "governance/capital" intervention deeply embedded in the social structure and a collective experimental art production intervention dissociated from the social structure. However, both forms of "production art" are essentially "unities of opposites" integrating incorporation and resistance, consistent with the socialist art policy of promoting the flourishing of all types of arts. Though the aesthetic divide between "art for society's sake" and "art for art's sake" positions these artistic interventions in different places in society, we argue that the domain of Chinese contemporary art is shifting away from the studio and toward scenes, events, experience, and dialogue. The approach of "the era of mass art" also means that "art-as-resistance" is being legitimized as "art-as-incorporation" in a subtle but unremitting way.