This study explored the psychological mechanism of how journalists, as a critical interest group responsible for disseminating accurate information to the public, affectively respond to misinformation. Building on the influence of presumed media influence (IPMI) theory, this survey of Chinese journalists (N = 574) reveals that journalists’ presumed influence of misinformation on others is positively associated with their perception of journalism’s normative role, mental resilience towards misinformation, and work anxiety. Journalists’ mental resilience towards misinformation is the dynamic attenuating their anxiety. The study suggests that the perceived social impact of journalists’ own work on the public negatively moderates the relationship between the presumed influence of misinformation and the perceived functions of journalism, as well as the relationship between the presumed influence of misinformation and work anxiety. This study thus contends that journalists’ confidence in the efficacy of journalism as an institution and in their own professional endeavors can enhance their well-being and their tenets to serve the public.
AltaySAcerbiA (2024) People believe misinformation is a threat because they assume others are gullible. New Media & Society26(11): 6440–6461. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448231153379
BalodHSSHameleersM (2021) Fighting for truth? The role perceptions of Filipino journalists in an era of mis- and disinformation. Journalism22(9): 2368–2385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919865109
4.
BossioDHoltonAE (2021) Burning out and turning off: journalists’ disconnection strategies on social media. Journalism22(10): 2475–2492. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919872076
5.
ChanJMPanZLeeFLF (2004) Professional aspirations and job satisfaction: Chinese journalists at a time of change in the media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly81(2): 254–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900408100203
6.
ChristiansCGGlasserTMcQuailD, et al. (2009) Normative Theories of the Media: Journalism in Democratic Societies. University of Illinois Press.
Dworznik-HoakG (2020) Emotional labor during disaster coverage: exploring expectations for emotional display. Journalism Practice16(5): 864–882. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1816858
9.
FreilingIKrauseNMScheufeleDA, et al. (2023) Believing and sharing misinformation, fact-checks, and accurate information on social media: the role of anxiety during COVID-19. New Media & Society25(1): 141–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211011451
GuntherACBoltDBorzekowskiDLG, et al. (2006) Presumed influence on peer norms: how mass media indirectly affect adolescent smoking. Journal of Communication56: 52–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2006.00002.x
15.
GuoL (2020) China’s “fake news” problem: exploring the spread of online rumors in the government-controlled news media. Digital Journalism8(8): 992–1010. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1766986
16.
GuoLChenH-T (2022) The impact of social media on civic engagement in China: the moderating role of citizenship norms in the citizen communication mediation model. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly99(4): 980–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/10776990211057139
17.
HanitzschTVosTP (2017) Journalistic roles and the struggle over institutional identity: the discursive constitution of journalism. Communication Theory27(2): 115–135, Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/comt.12112
18.
HanitzschTVosTPStandaertO, et al. (2019) Role orientations: journalists’ views on their place in society. In: Worlds of Journalism: Journalistic Cultures Around the Globe. Columbia University Press, pp. 161–198. https://doi.org/10.7312/hani18642-008
19.
HaoXGeorgeCCongS (2013) Job satisfaction of journalists: professional aspirations, newsroom culture and social context. Media Asia40(1): 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/01296612.2013.11689952
20.
HayesAF (2013) Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-based Approach. Guilford Press.
21.
HoSSGohTJLeungYW (2020) Let’s nab fake science news: predicting scientists’ support for interventions using the influence of presumed media influence model. Journalism23(4): 910–928. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884920937488
22.
JahngMREckertSMetzger-RiftkinJ (2023) Defending the profession: U.S. journalists’ role understanding in the era of fake news. Journalism Practice17(2): 226–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2021.1919177
23.
JangSMKimJK (2018) Third person effects of fake news: fake news regulation and media literacy interventions. Computers in Human Behavior80: 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.11.034
24.
KoliskaMChadhaKBurnsA (2020) Talking back: journalists defending attacks against their profession in the Trump era. Journalism Studies21(11): 1496–1513. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2020.1763190
25.
KovachBRosenstielT (2007) The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. 1st rev. ed.Three Rivers Press.
26.
LealPCGoesTCda SilvaLCF, et al. (2017) Trait vs. state anxiety in different threatening situations. Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy39(3): 147–157. https://doi.org/10.1590/2237-6089-2016-0044
27.
LechelerSEgelhoferJL (2022) Disinformation, misinformation, and fake news: understanding the supply side. In: StrömbäckJWikforssÅGlüerK, et al. (eds) Knowledge Resistance in High-Choice Information Environments. Routledge, pp. 69–87.
28.
LechelerSGattermannKAalderingL (2024) Disinformation and the Brussels bubble: EU correspondents’ concerns and competences in a digital age. Journalism25(8): 1736–1753. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231188259
29.
LiMChittyN (2021) Paradox of professionalism: the professional identity of journalists who work across media cultures. Journalism22(1): 157–175. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849177431
LiuXLoVHWeiR (2020) Violent videogames, telepresence, presumed influence, and support for taking restrictive and protective actions. Sage Open10(2): 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020919524
32.
LiuXPangSLiX (2024) The effects of journalists’ job perceptions on job satisfaction and organizational commitment moderated by altruism. Journalism Practice18(10): 2512–2530. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2022.2142838
33.
LongQShaoL (2023) Beyond propaganda: the changing journalistic practices of China’s party press in the digital era. Journalism Practice17(4): 799–813. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2021.1949628
34.
MastenAS (2014) Global perspectives on resilience in children and youth. Child Development85(1): 6–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12205
35.
McIntyreKDahmenNSAbdenourJ (2018) The contextualist function: US newspaper journalists value social responsibility. Journalism19(12): 1657–1675. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849166835
36.
MüllerPHohlfeldR (2017) How journalists think about media effects—And why we should care. Atlantic Journal of Communication25(2): 88–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870.2017.1286343
37.
MuschallaBLindenMOlbrichD (2010) The relationship between job-anxiety and trait-anxiety-a differential diagnostic investigation with the job-anxiety-scale and the state-trait-anxiety-inventory. Journal of Anxiety Disorders24(3): 366–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.02.001
38.
NovakRJDavidsonS (2013) Journalists reporting on hazardous events: constructing protective factors within the professional role. Traumatology19(4): 313–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534765613481854
39.
ParkerDMansteadASRStradlingSG (1995) Extending the theory of planned behaviour: the role of personal norm. British Journal of Social Psychology34(2): 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1995.tb01053.x
40.
PearsonMMcMahonCO’DonovanA, et al. (2021) Building journalists’ resilience through mindfulness strategies. Journalism22(7): 1647–1664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919833253
41.
RaemyP (2021) A theory of professional identity in journalism: connecting discursive institutionalism, socialization, and psychological resilience theory. Communication Theory31: 841–861. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtaa019
42.
RaperMJBroughPBiggsA (2024) Is it all about the personal resources? The moderating role of resilience on daily stress appraisal and emotion. Work & Stress38(3): 248–269. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2023.2283217
RobertsJKoliskaM (2025) The toll of fighting misinformation: precarity in fact-checking work. Journalism1–19. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849251355817
45.
SaldañaMVuHT (2021) You are fake news! factors impacting journalists’ debunking behaviors on social media. Digital Journalism10(5): 823–842. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.2004554
46.
SchapalsAK (2018) Fake news: Australian and British journalists’ role perceptions in an era of “alternative facts”. Journalism Practice12(8): 976–985. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2018.1511822
47.
SchapalsAKBrunsA (2022) Responding to “fake news”: journalistic perceptions of and reactions to a delegitimising force. Media and Communication10(3): 5–16. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v10i3.5401
SinclairVGWallstonKA (2004) The development and psychometric evaluation of the brief resilient coping scale. Assessment11(1): 94–101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191103258144
50.
SpielbergerCHRickmanRL (1990). Assessment of state and trait anxiety. In SartoriusNAndreoliVCassanoG, et al. (Eds.), Anxiety: Psychobiological and Clinical Perspectives (pp. 69–84). Taylor & Francis, WA.
Tal-OrNTsfatiYGuntherAC (2009) The influence of presumed media influence: origins and implications of the third-person perception. In: NabiRLOliverMB (eds) The Sage Handbook of Media Processes and Effects. Sage, pp. 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119011071.iemp0129
TandocECJr.DuffyAJones-JangSM, et al. (2021) Poisoning the information well?Journal of Language and Politics20(5): 783–802. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.21029.tan
56.
TongJ (2022) Confronting COVID-19: constructing and contesting legitimacy through the media in Chinese contexts. Chinese Journal of Communication15(2): 145–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2022.2054514
57.
van AntwerpenNTurnbullDSearstonRA (2022) Perspectives from journalism professionals on the application and benefits of constructive reporting for addressing misinformation. The International Journal of Press/Politics28(4): 1037–1058. https://doi.org/10.1177/19401612211072782
58.
van der MeerTGLAHameleersM (2024) Perceptions of misinformation salience: a cross-country comparison of estimations of misinformation prevalence and third-person perceptions. Information, Communication & Society28: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2375256
WangMRaoMSunZ (2022) Typology, etiology, and fact-checking: a pathological study of top fake news in China. Journalism Practice16(4): 719–737. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2020.1806723
WeeksBE (2015) Emotions, partisanship, and misperceptions: how anger and anxiety moderate the effect of partisan bias on susceptibility to political misinformation. Journal of Communication65(4): 699–719. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12164
63.
WeiRLoVHZhangX, et al. (2024) Examining the impact of digital information environment, information processing, and presumed influence on behavior response to COVID-19 misinformation in Asia. New Media & Society27(9): 5257–5280. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241252391
64.
WestlundOBelair-GagnonVGravesL, et al. (2024) What is the problem with misinformation? Fact-checking as a sociotechnical and problem-solving practice. Journalism Studies25(8): 898–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2024.2357316
YipJALevineEEBrooksAW, et al. (2020) Worry at work: how organizational culture promotes anxiety. Research in Organizational Behavior40: 100124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2020.100124
67.
YuXWangJ (2024) Is journalism just a job? Findings on journalists’ career motivation, news efficacy and news avoidance from structural equation modeling in China. Journalism25(6): 1422–1442. https://doi.org/10.1177/14648849231182530
68.
YuWShenFMinC (2022) Correcting science misinformation in an authoritarian country: an experiment from China. Telematics and Informatics66: 101749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2021.101749
69.
YuWPaytonBSunM, et al. (2023) Toward an integrated framework for misinformation and correction sharing: a systematic review across domains. New Media & Society28(5): 2241–2267. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221116
ZhangSIZhuJWangY (2024) China: a diverse and complex media landscape. In: SchapalsAKPentzoldC (eds) Media Compass: A Companion to International Media Landscapes. John Wiley & Sons, pp. 292–301. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781394196272.ch28
