Scholars have rapidly produced a robust body of literature addressing the public's beliefs in, and interactions with “misinformation.” Despite the literature's stated concerns about the underlying truth value of the information and beliefs in question, the field has thus far operated without a reliable epistemology for determining the truth of the information and beliefs in question, often leaving researchers (or third parties) to make such determinations based on loose definitions and a naïve epistemology. We argue that, while this area of research has made great strides in recent years, more attention to definitions, epistemology, and terminology would both improve the validity of the literature and prevent the field of misinformation studies from becoming political conflict by another name.

学者们迅速创作了大量的文献来探讨公众对“错误信息”的信念以及与“错误信息”的互动。尽管文献表达了对相关信息和信念的潜在真实价值的担忧，但迄今为止，该领域的运作还没有可靠的认识论来确定相关信息和信念的真实性，常常让研究人员（或第三方）做出这种决定基于松散的定义和朴素的认识论。我们认为，虽然这一研究领域近年来取得了长足的进步，但对定义、认识论和术语的更多关注既可以提高文献的有效性，又可以防止错误信息研究领域变成政治冲突。