SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 26 Sayı: 3

The Representation of Digital Disinformation in Young Adults' Minds: A Metaphorical Review

Dijital Dezenformasyonun Genç Zihinlerdeki Temsili: Metaforik Bir İnceleme

Abdullah Yıldırmaz(BATMAN ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0712-7816
Pages
1554–1568
Publication Date
2026-09-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The analyses revealed that the metaphors were grouped under five themes: “Harmful Entities,” “Distorters/Obscurers of Reality,” “Deceptive and Camouflaging,” “Psychological/Social Effects,” and “Attractive yet Dangerous.” All identified metaphors carried negative connotations.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of the study is to reveal the mental images of young people regarding the concept of digital disinformation through metaphors.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participant group of the study consists of individuals who took part in the European Commission Erasmus+ KA154 Youth Participation Project titled “Combating Digital Disinformation with Emotion Regulation Skills.” The study included young people aged 18–30 who are undergraduate students at various universities in Türkiye and participated in training sessions on digital disinformation within the scope of the project.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The analyses revealed that the metaphors were grouped under five themes: “Harmful Entities,” “Distorters/Obscurers of Reality,” “Deceptive and Camouflaging,” “Psychological/Social Effects,” and “Attractive yet Dangerous.” All identified metaphors carried negative connotations.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İletişim · Dijital Dezenformasyon · Gençlik Çalışmaları

Abstract

The aim of the study is to reveal the mental images of young people regarding the concept of digital disinformation through metaphors. The participant group of the study consists of individuals who took part in the European Commission Erasmus+ KA154 Youth Participation Project titled “Combating Digital Disinformation with Emotion Regulation Skills.” The study included young people aged 18–30 who are undergraduate students at various universities in Türkiye and participated in training sessions on digital disinformation within the scope of the project. The metaphor completion method was used as the data collection tool, and participants were asked to complete the prompt “Digital disinformation is like ..., because ...”. The data collected were analyzed using content analysis and descriptive analysis techniques, through which main themes and conceptual categories were identified. The analyses revealed that the metaphors were grouped under five themes: “Harmful Entities,” “Distorters/Obscurers of Reality,” “Deceptive and Camouflaging,” “Psychological/Social Effects,” and “Attractive yet Dangerous.” All identified metaphors carried negative connotations.

Özet

Çalışmanın amacı, gençlerin dijital dezenformasyon kavramına yönelik zihinsel imgelerini metaforlar yoluyla ortaya çıkarmaktır. Çalışmanın katılımcı grubu, “Duygu Düzenleme Becerisiyle Dijital Dezenformasyonla Mücadele” adlı Avrupa Komisyonu Erasmus+ KA154 Gençlik Katılımı Projesi’ne katılan bireylerden oluşmaktadır. Çalışmaya, Türkiye’nin çeşitli üniversitelerinde lisans düzeyinde öğrenim gören ve proje kapsamında dijital dezenformasyona yönelik eğitimlere katılan 18–30 yaş aralığındaki gençler dahil edilmiştir. Çalışmada veri toplama aracı olarak metafor tamamlama yöntemi tercih edilmiş, katılımcılardan “Dijital dezenformasyon ... gibidir, çünkü ...” ifadesini tamamlamaları istenmiştir. Elde edilen veriler, içerik analizi ve betimsel analiz teknikleriyle incelenmiş; bu doğrultuda temel temalar ve kavramsal kategoriler belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen analizler neticesinde metaforların “Zararlı Varlıklar”, “Gerçeği Çarpıtan / Görmeyi Engelleyen”, “Kamufle Eden ve Aldatan”, “Psikolojik / Sosyal Etkiler” ve “Çekici ama Tehlikeli” olmak üzere toplam 5 tema altında toplandığı ve tamamının olumsuz anlama sahip olduğu görülmüştür.

🔖

Cite This Article

Yıldırmaz, A. (2026). The Representation of Digital Disinformation in Young Adults' Minds: A Metaphorical Review. Abant İzzet Baysal Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 26 Sayı: 3, 1554–1568. https://doi.org/10.17240/aibuefd.2026..-1830150

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (30)

  1. Aïmeur, E., Amri, S., & Brassard, G. (2023). Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review. Social Network Analysis and Mining, 13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13278-023-01028-5
  2. Amazeen, M., & Bucy, E. (2019). Conferring Resistance to Digital Disinformation: The Inoculating Influence of Procedural News Knowledge. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63, 415 - 432. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2019.1653101
  3. Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European journal of communication, 33(2), 122-139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317
  4. Boyd, D. (2014). It's complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.
  5. Buchanan, T. (2020). Why do people spread false information online? The effects of message and viewer characteristics on self-reported likelihood of sharing social media disinformation. PLoS ONE, 15. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239666
  6. Cinelli, M., De Francisci Morales, G., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Starnini, M. (2021). The echo chamber effect on social media. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2023301118
  7. Diaz Ruiz, C., & Nilsson, T. (2023). Disinformation and echo chambers: How disinformation circulates on social media through identity-driven controversies. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 42(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/07439156221103852
  8. Diepeveen, S., & Pinet, M. (2022). User perspectives on digital literacy as a response to misinformation. Development Policy Review. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12671
  9. Fetzer, J. (2004). Disinformation: The Use of False Information. Minds and Machines, 14, 231-240. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:mind.0000021683.28604.5b
  10. Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science advances, 5(1), eaau4586. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aau4586
  11. Hameleers, M., Powell, T., Van Der Meer, T., & Bos, L. (2020). A Picture Paints a Thousand Lies? The Effects and Mechanisms of Multimodal Disinformation and Rebuttals Disseminated via Social Media. Political Communication, 37, 281 - 301. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2019.1674979.
  12. Kapantai, E., Christopoulou, A., Berberidis, C., & Peristeras, V. (2020). A systematic literature review on disinformation: Toward a unified taxonomical framework. New Media & Society, 23, 1301 - 1326. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820959296
  13. Kövecses, Z. (2020). Extended conceptual metaphor theory. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108859127
  14. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Sage.
  15. Lakoff, G. & Johnson, M. (1980), Metaphors We Live By, Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press.
  16. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
  17. Moscovici,S.(1973). Foreword.C.Herzlich(Ed.), Healthandillness: Asocial psychological analysis in (s. ix-xiv). Academic Press.
  18. Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071802878
  19. Papapicco, C., Lamanna, I., & D’Errico, F. (2022). Adolescents' Vulnerability to Fake News and to Racial Hoaxes: A Qualitative Analysis on Italian Sample. Multimodal Technol. Interact., 6, 20. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6030020
  20. Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press.
  21. Pérez-Escolar, M., Lilleker, D., & Tapia-Frade, A. (2023). A Systematic Literature Review of the Phenomenon of Disinformation and Misinformation. Media and Communication. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v11i2.6453
  22. Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Dryhurst, S., Kerr, J., Freeman, A. L., Recchia, G.,. & Van Der Linden, S. (2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society open science, 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199
  23. Saban, A. (2008). Okula ilişkin metaforlar. Kuram ve uygulamada eğitim yönetimi, 55(55), 459-496.
  24. Schmitt, R. (2005). Systematic metaphor analysis as a method of qualitative research. The Qualitative Report, 10(2), 358–394. https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2005.1854
  25. Thibodeau, P., & Boroditsky, L. (2011). Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning. PLoS ONE, 6. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0016782
  26. Thibodeau, P., Matlock, T., & Flusberg, S. (2019). The role of metaphor in communication and thought. Lang. Linguistics Compass, 13. https://doi.org/10.1111/lnc3.12327
  27. Törnberg, P. (2018). Echo chambers and viral misinformation: Modeling fake news as complex contagion. PLoS ONE, 13. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0203958
  28. Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
  29. Wineburg, S., & McGrew, S. (2016). Why students can’t Google their way to the truth. Education Week, 36(11), 22-28.
  30. Roozenbeek, J., Schneider, C. R., Dryhurst, S., Kerr, J., Freeman, A. L., Recchia, G.,. & Van Der Linden, S. (2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about COVID-19 around the world. Royal Society open science, 7(10), 201199. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.201199