Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.96> Article
Research Article

Technological Enablement and Collective Effervescence: The Diffusion Logic and Governance Dilemmas of Online Misinformation

Cheng JiBeijing Normal-Hong Kong Baptist University*

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

The proliferation of online misinformation, poses a significant threat to contemporary information ecosystems. This paper examines the dual dynamics fueling this issue: Technological Enablement, which explores how social media architecture and algorithms facilitate the rapid spread of falsehoods, and Collective Effervescence, which investigates the social and cognitive mechanisms driving user participation in these diffusion processes. Studies have consistently demonstrated that false information is more prone to dissemination than accurate information, primarily because it frequently elicits more pronounced emotional responses—an attribute that can facilitate its viral propagation. This study uses a cognitive cascade model to examine the entire lifecycle of misinformation. The findings indicate that the diffusion logic of misinformation differs fundamentally from that of true news. Because fact-checking, no matter how good it is, fails to dispel fake news for the public, particularly in highly polarized situations, traditional governance tactics frequently prove ineffectual. To foster a more robust information ecosystem, the conclusion of this paper addresses the prominent governance dilemmas arising from this dynamic and proposes a shift toward contextually nuanced strategies.

Keywords: Misinformation; Social Media; Diffusion Logic; Cognitive Bias; Governance Dilemmas
Published: November 19, 2025
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2025.BJ29691
Volume: CHR Vol.96
pp. 90-95
Download PDF

References

  1. Mouratidis D, Kanavos A, Kermanidis K. From Misinformation to Insight: Machine Learning Strategies for Fake News Detection.  Information. 2025; 16(3): 189.
  2. Rabb N, Cowen L, de Ruiter JP, Scheutz M. Cognitive cascades: How to model (and potentially counter) the spread of fake news.  PLOS ONE. 2022; 17(1): e0261811.
  3. Tomassi M, Monaco A, Rossi L, Poltronieri A. Mapping automatic social media information disorder. First Monday. 2024; 29(1).
  4. Papanikou V, Christou G, Panagopoulos O, Dimitriou N, Kanavos A, Kermanidis K. Health Misinformation in Social Networks: A Survey of Information Technology Approaches.  Information. 2025; 16(5): 262.
  5. Vlasceanu M. Cognitive Processes Shaping Individual and Collective Belief Systems [dissertation]. Princeton University; 2021.
  6. Han Y. Examining Production, Dissemination, and Consumption of Misinformation: The Case of COVID-19 Pandemic [dissertation]. The University of North Carolina at Greensboro; 2021.
  7. Marcondes FS, Barbosa MA, Gala A dCOS, Almeida JJ, Novais P. Emotional and Mental Nuances and Technological Approaches: Optimising Fact-Check Dissemination through Cognitive Reinforcement Technique.  Electronics. 2024; 13(1): 240.
  8. Shao C, Ciampaglia GL, Varol O, Flammini A, Menczer F. The spread of low-credibility content by social bots.  Nature Communications. 2018; 9(1): 4787.
  9. Miller S. Examining Engagement Behavior on Social Media Related to Fake News [dissertation]. University of South Alabama; 2019.
  10. Soga K, O'Brien F, Harrison L, Johnson S, Hall M. Graph-Based Interpretability for Fake News Detection.  arXiv preprint arXiv: 2401.03158. 2024.