Model Matematika Dinamika Misinformasi dengan Intervensi Fact-Checking pada Interaksi Digital
Abstract
Misinformation can persist in digital interactions even after corrections have been provided, highlighting the need for an analytical measure of intervention intensity capable of changing its dynamical regime. This study develops a three-state mathematical model consisting of individuals who do not believe misinformation and are not undergoing active correction, individuals who believe misinformation, and individuals who have received corrective information. Fact-checking intervention is modeled as a constant additional correction rate. The analysis encompasses conservation and positive invariance, equilibria, local stability, bifurcation, center manifold analysis, sensitivity analysis, and numerical simulations using the fourth-order Runge–Kutta method. The model yields a persistence index that decreases with increasing fact-checking intensity and an explicit intervention threshold. Under the assumed simulation parameters, this threshold is 0.20. Below the threshold, increasing intervention intensity reduces the equilibrium proportion of individuals believing misinformation but does not eliminate its persistence. At the threshold, two equilibrium branches exchange stability through a transcritical bifurcation, and the system exhibits critical slowing down. Simulations up to time 3000 show that the scaled values of misinformation prevalence, the corrected state, and the distance from the misinformation-free equilibrium approach asymptotic constants of 0.5, 2, and 2.5, respectively. Above the threshold, the misinformation-free equilibrium becomes stable. Numerical verification using step sizes of 0.02 and 0.01 yields conservation errors on the order of 10-14 and differences between numerical trajectories on the order of 10-13. These findings distinguish subcritical interventions, which merely reduce misinformation persistence, from supercritical interventions, which induce a change in the dynamical regime. All model parameters and initial conditions are assumed for simulation purposes and are not estimated from empirical data on digital platform users.
Downloads
References
Arechar, A. A., Allen, J., Berinsky, A. J., Cole, R., Epstein, Z., Garimella, K., et al. (2023). Understanding and combatting misinformation across 16 countries on six continents. Nature Human Behaviour, 7, 1502-1513. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01641-6
Bode, L., Vraga, E. K., & Tang, R. (2024). User correction. Current Opinion in Psychology, 56, 101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101786
Burel, G., Tavakoli, M., & Alani, H. (2024). Exploring the impact of automated correction of misinformation in social media. AI Magazine, 45(2), 227-245. https://doi.org/10.1002/aaai.12180
Butcher, J. C. (2016). Numerical methods for ordinary differential equations (3rd ed.). Wiley.
Butts, D. J., Bollman, S. A., & Murillo, M. S. (2023). Mathematical modeling of disinformation and effectiveness of mitigation policies. Scientific Reports, 13, 18735. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-45710-2
Carey, J. M., Guess, A. M., Loewen, P. J., Merkley, E., Nyhan, B., Phillips, J. B., & Reifler, J. (2022). The ephemeral effects of fact-checks on COVID-19 misperceptions in the United States, Great Britain and Canada. Nature Human Behaviour, 6, 236-243. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01278-3
Chan, M.-p. S., & Albarracín, D. (2023). A meta-analysis of correction effects in science-relevant misinformation. Nature Human Behaviour, 7, 1514-1525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01623-8
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 13-29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Jiang, M., Gao, Q., & Zhuang, J. (2021). Reciprocal spreading and debunking processes of online misinformation: A new rumor spreading-debunking model with a case study. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, 565, 125572. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2020.125572
Kemp, P. L., Loaiza, V. M., & Wahlheim, C. N. (2022). Fake news reminders and veracity labels differentially benefit memory and belief accuracy for news headlines. Scientific Reports, 12, 21829. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25649-6
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the post-truth era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008
Martalò, G., Menale, M., & Travaglini, R. (2025). Modeling prebunking strategies to contain misinformation spread. Results in Applied Mathematics, 26, 100591. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinam.2025.100591
Martalò, G., Menale, M., & Travaglini, R. (2026). Controlling misinformation spread through debunking and prebunking strategies. Ricerche di Matematica. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11587-026-01122-8
Matias, J. N. (2023). Influencing recommendation algorithms to reduce the spread of unreliable news by encouraging humans to fact-check articles, in a field experiment. Scientific Reports, 13, 11715. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-38277-5
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2022). Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation. Nature Communications, 13, 2333. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-30073-5
Porter, E., & Wood, T. J. (2024). Factual corrections: Concerns and current evidence. Current Opinion in Psychology, 55, 101715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101715
Prike, T., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2023). Effective correction of misinformation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 54, 101712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2023.101712
Strogatz, S. H. (2015). Nonlinear dynamics and chaos: With applications to physics, biology, chemistry, and engineering (2nd ed.). Westview Press.
Sun, X., Wang, Y., Chai, Y., & Liu, Y. (2024). Dynamic analysis and control strategies of the SEIHR rumor diffusion model in online social networks. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 134, 611-634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2024.06.005
Westbrook, V., Wegener, D. T., & Susmann, M. W. (2023). Mechanisms in continued influence: The impact of misinformation corrections on source perceptions. Memory & Cognition, 51(6), 1317-1330. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-023-01402-w



















.png)