Reinforcement Learning-based Counter-Misinformation Response Generation: A Case Study of COVID-19 Vaccine Misinformation
Bing He, Mustaque Ahamad, Srijan Kumar
Abstract
The spread of online misinformation threatens public health, democracy, and the broader society. While professional fact-checkers form the first line of defense by fact-checking popular false claims, they do not engage directly in conversations with misinformation spreaders. On the other hand, non-expert ordinary users act as eyeson-the-ground who proactively counter misinformation -recent research has shown that 96% counter-misinformation responses are made by ordinary users. However, research also found that 2/3 times, these responses are rude and lack evidence. This work seeks to create a counter-misinformation response generation model to empower users to effectively correct misinformation. This objective is challenging due to the absence of datasets containing groundtruth of ideal counter-misinformation responses, and the lack of models that can generate responses backed by communication theories. In this work, we create two novel datasets of misinformation and counter-misinformation response pairs from in-the-wild social media and crowdsourcing from college-educated students. We annotate the collected data to distinguish poor from ideal responses that are factual, polite, and refute misinformation. We propose MisinfoCorrect, a reinforcement learning-based framework that learns to generate counter-misinformation responses for an input misinformation post. The model rewards the generator to increase the politeness, factuality, and refutation attitude while retaining text fluency and relevancy. Quantitative and qualitative evaluation shows that our model outperforms several baselines by generating high-quality counter-responses. This work illustrates the promise of generative text models for social good -here, to help create a safe and reliable information ecosystem. The code and data is accessible on https://github.com/claws-lab/MisinfoCorrect . CCS CONCEPTS • Computing methodologies → Natural language generation; Reinforcement learning.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 05155e89-d22d-4e66-8762-312d59ba4f0fCited by top-tier papers14
- Did the Roll-Out of Community Notes Reduce Engagement With Misinformation on X/Twitter?Yuwei Chuai, Haoye Tian, Nicolas Pröllochs, Gabriele LenziniCSCW 2024 · 62 citations
- Supernotes: Driving Consensus in Crowd-Sourced Fact-CheckingSoham De, Michiel A. Bakker, Jay Baxter, Martin SaveskiWWW 2025 · 31 citations
- MetaAdapt: Domain Adaptive Few-Shot Misinformation Detection via Meta LearningZhenrui Yue, Huimin Zeng, Yang Zhang, Lanyu Shang et al.ACL 2023 · 23 citations
- MemeGuard: An LLM and VLM-based Framework for Advancing Content Moderation via Meme InterventionPrince Jha, Raghav Jain, Konika Mandal, Aman Chadha et al.ACL 2024 · 5 citations
- Collaboration and Controversy Among Experts: Rumor Early Detection by Tuning a Comment GeneratorBing Wang, Bingrui Zhao, Ximing Li, Changchun Li et al.SIGIR 2025 · 4 citations
Builds on11
- BART: Denoising Sequence-to-Sequence Pre-training for Natural Language Generation, Translation, and ComprehensionMike Lewis, Yinhan Liu, Naman Goyal, Marjan Ghazvininejad et al.ACL 2020 · 1,224 citations
- Towards Facilitating Empathic Conversations in Online Mental Health Support: A Reinforcement Learning ApproachAshish Sharma, Inna W. Lin, Adam S. Miner, David C. Atkins et al.WWW 2021 · 183 citations
- Perverse Downstream Consequences of Debunking: Being Corrected by Another User for Posting False Political News Increases Subsequent Sharing of Low Quality, Partisan, and Toxic Content in a Twitter Field ExperimentMohsen Mosleh, Cameron Martel, Dean Eckles, David G. RandCHI 2021 · 109 citations
- Birds of a feather don't fact-check each other: Partisanship and the evaluation of news in Twitter's Birdwatch crowdsourced fact-checking programJennifer Allen, Cameron Martel, David G. RandCHI 2022 · 104 citations
- Countering Fake News: A Comparison of Possible Solutions Regarding User Acceptance and EffectivenessJan Kirchner, Christian ReuterCSCW 2020 · 89 citations
Related papers
- Countering Misinformation via Emotional Response GenerationDaniel Russo, Shane P. Kaszefski-Yaschuk, Jacopo Staiano, Marco GueriniEMNLP 2023 · 4 citations
- F²RL: Factuality and Faithfulness Reinforcement Learning Framework for Claim-Guided Evidence-Supported Counterspeech GenerationHaiyang Wang, Yuchen Pan, Xin Song, Xuechen Zhao et al.EMNLP 2024 · 1 citation
- MisinfoEval: Generative AI in the Era of "Alternative Facts"Saadia Gabriel, Liang Lyu, James Siderius, Marzyeh Ghassemi et al.EMNLP 2024 · 3 citations
- Missing Counter-Evidence Renders NLP Fact-Checking Unrealistic for MisinformationMax Glockner, Yufang Hou, Iryna GurevychEMNLP 2022 · 23 citations
- Integrating Argumentation and Hate-Speech-based Techniques for Countering MisinformationSougata Saha, Rohini K. SrihariEMNLP 2024 · 2 citations
