R0051/2026-03-31/Q001/SRC05
Cazzamatta (2025) — Verification factors behind fact-checkers' selection decisions
Source
Summary
| Dimension |
Rating |
| Reliability |
Medium-High |
| Relevance |
Medium |
| Bias: Missing data |
Low risk |
| Bias: Measurement |
Some concerns |
| Bias: Selective reporting |
Low risk |
| Bias: Randomization |
N/A — not an RCT |
| Bias: Protocol deviation |
N/A — not an RCT |
| Bias: COI/Funding |
Low risk |
Rationale
| Dimension |
Rationale |
| Reliability |
Large-scale study — 40 interviews, 3154 articles, 8 countries, 20+ organizations. Peer-reviewed. |
| Relevance |
Documents verification practices but focuses on claim selection rather than evidence evaluation methodology. Indirect evidence about framework existence. |
| Bias flags |
Interview self-reporting may not capture actual practices accurately (measurement concern). |
| Evidence ID |
Summary |
| SRC05-E01 |
Verification triage system based on virality, checkability, and social impact |