Do tabloids poison the well of social media? Explaining democratically dysfunctional news sharing

This paper was accepted for publication in the journal New Media and Society and the definitive published version is available at https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818769689The use of social media for sharing political information and the status of news as an essential raw material for good citizenship are both generating increasing public concern. We add to the debates about misinformation, disinformation, and “fake news” using a new theoretical framework and a unique research design integrating survey data and analysis of observed news sharing behaviors on social media. Using a media-as-resources perspective, we theorize that there are elective affinities between tabloid news and misinformation and disinformation behaviors on social media. Integrating four data sets we constructed during the 2017 UK election campaign—individual-level data on news sharing (N = 1,525,748 tweets), website data (N = 17,989 web domains), news article data (N = 641 articles), and data from a custom survey of Twitter users (N = 1313 respondents)—we find that sharing tabloid news on social media is a significant predictor of democratically dysfunctional misinformation and disinformation behaviors. We explain the consequences of this finding for the civic culture of social media and the direction of future scholarship on fake news

Assessments Related to the Physical, Affective and Cognitive Domains of Physical Literacy Amongst Children Aged 7–11.9 Years: A Systematic Review

Background Over the past decade, there has been increased interest amongst researchers, practitioners and policymakers in physical literacy for children and young people and the assessment of the concept within physical education (PE). This systematic review aimed to identify tools to assess physical literacy and its physical, cognitive and affective domains within children aged 7–11.9 years, and to examine the measurement properties, feasibility and elements of physical literacy assessed within each tool. Methods Six databases (EBSCO host platform, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Scopus, Education Research Complete, SPORTDiscus) were searched up to 10th September 2020. Studies were included if they sampled children aged between 7 and 11.9 years, employed field-based assessments of physical literacy and/or related affective, physical or cognitive domains, reported measurement properties (quantitative) or theoretical development (qualitative), and were published in English in peer-reviewed journals. The methodological quality and measurement properties of studies and assessment tools were appraised using the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments risk of bias checklist. The feasibility of each assessment was considered using a utility matrix and elements of physical literacy element were recorded using a descriptive checklist. Results The search strategy resulted in a total of 11467 initial results. After full text screening, 11 studies (3 assessments) related to explicit physical literacy assessments. Forty-four studies (32 assessments) were relevant to the affective domain, 31 studies (15 assessments) were relevant to the physical domain and 2 studies (2 assessments) were included within the cognitive domain. Methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties within the included studies were mixed. The Canadian Assessment of Physical Literacy-2 and the Passport For Life had evidence of acceptable measurement properties from studies of very good methodological quality and assessed a wide range of physical literacy elements. Feasibility results indicated that many tools would be suitable for a primary PE setting, though some require a level of expertise to administer and score that would require training. Conclusions This review has identified a number of existing assessments that could be useful in a physical literacy assessment approach within PE and provides further information to empower researchers and practitioners to make informed decisions when selecting the most appropriate assessment for their needs, purpose and context. The review indicates that researchers and tool developers should aim to improve the methodological quality and reporting of measurement properties of assessments to better inform the field. Trial registration PROSPERO: CRD4201706221