Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Thinking Skills and Creativity

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tsc

Fact-Checking Skills And Project-Based Learning About Infodemic

And Disinformation
Marta Pérez-Escolar a, *, Eva Ordóñez-Olmedo a, Purificación Alcaide-Pulido b
a
Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Avda. de las Universidades, s/n, 41704, Dos Hermanas, Sevilla (España)
b
Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Escritor Castilla Aguayo, 4, 14004, Córdoba (España)

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In today’s high-information and high-communication society, university students are increasingly
fact-checking involved in autonomous and collaborative learning processes, which require active methodolo­
fact-checking skills, disinformation gies to facilitate the integration of social competencies. The objective of this study was to raise
infodemic
awareness of the risks of disinformation and infodemics and to identify the main social compe­
University
fake class
tencies and skills related to fact-checking that students should acquire. Based on thematic-
verification experiential classes and through the project-based learning methodology, this teaching experi­
thematic-experiential classes ence consisted of lecturing a fake class in the communication degree programme, in which the
project-based learning professor gave a speech to 150 students about coronavirus that contained both hoaxes and true
information, thus challenging students to identify false information. The results obtained in this
qualitative study are divided into three parts to answer each research question. The first part is
focused on identifying the most influential hoaxes about the coronavirus that young people have
embraced as reliable information during the 2020 pandemic (RQ1). The second part is dedicated
to explaining students’ reactions when they are involved in infodemic contexts. We also point out
the main challenge that arose in a period of infodemics (RQ2). In the third part, we propose the
main fact-checking skills that students should acquire to tackle disinformation in a period of
infodemics (RQ3). Training in these skills appeared to improve job performance and undoubtedly
contributed to the personal development of our future graduates.

1. INTRODUCTION

In chaotic and confusing times such as the present period, which is filled with political, cultural economic, technological and social
transformations, education represents an essential foundation that provides a better understanding of the current challenges and offers
solutions to embrace the changes we are already experiencing. For that reason, education is a valuable asset that favours the devel­
opment of innovation processes.
In doing so, Zamora-Polo et al. (2019) argue that comprehensive education permits the assessment of the effectiveness and quality
of the education process; therefore, it is important to include comprehensive education both inside and outside of the university
environment. Consequently, Crespí & García-Ramos (2021) state that the mission of the university is comprehensive, a “solid
human-focused education centred on the person and their learning process; that is, in teaching students to learn” (p. 300). In other

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: martaperez@uloyola.es (M. Pérez-Escolar), eordonez@uloyola.es (E. Ordóñez-Olmedo), palcaide@uloyola.es (P. Alcaide-
Pulido).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100887
Received 29 April 2021; Received in revised form 16 June 2021; Accepted 17 June 2021
Available online 24 June 2021
1871-1871/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

words, the main objective of university professors is to guarantee the teaching-learning process. In this context, communication plays a
significant role since it is not limited to educational fields but serves as a useful resource to acquire multiple competencies of an
academic and social nature.
Competencies in the social field are achieved through integrative learning experiences that are not based on mandatory content
that undergraduates must study (Fernández-Arias et al., 2020) but rather on knowledge, skills and attitudes (Ordóñez-Olmedo, 2017).
These three competency dimensions interact with each other to provide an efficient response in the task that is executed (Batistello &
Pereira, 2019). In line with the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and as a response to the Bologna Declaration in 1999 (Van der
Wende, 2000), the Tuning Educational Structures in Europe project has been established as a curricular approach focused on basic,
general, specific, and transversal competencies. This project proposal clearly aims at serving the social, scientific and technological
needs of society—who is increasingly more concerned about the quality of education, as well as the quality of information that is
spread and shared on the Internet—by implementing different syllabus coherently and examining the differences present in each
curriculum simultaneously (González & Wagenaar, 2006).
From the particular perspective of communication sciences, syllabuses have always been adapted to the demands of the field
(Flores-Vivar & López-López, 2020) to provide future professionals with the necessary tools, knowledge and skills that will enable
them to contend appropriately and realistically with the different professional challenges they will encounter in the labour market
(Acedo & Ruiz-Cabestre, 2011; Herrero-Diz & Varona Aramburu, 2017) and to tackle the challenges that converge in an increasingly
globalized, interconnected and volatile world in which communication and socialization have become essential assets (Roncan­
cio-Ortiz et al., 2017). Accordingly, as a part of the natural process of adjusting to the new and current reality, future communication
professionals need to acquire the skills and competencies related to fact-checking (Mantzarlis, 2018) since disinformation (Wardle &
Derakhshan, 2017) has become a global problem (Pal & Banerjee, 2019).
The journalists’ association in Madrid urges futures communicators to combat disinformation (APM, 2019) because the survival of
journalism depends to a large extent on how the media guides their fight against hoaxes and inaccurate or misleading content (APM,
2019). Moreover, according to the Edelman barometer (2020), there is a general concern about the existing false information related to
COVID-19; specifically, 74% of those surveyed affirmed that they are very worried about the great number of hoaxes about the
coronavirus that are spread and shared on social networks. As is the case with other previous health crises—the Severe Acute Res­
piratory Syndrome (SARS) in 2003; the Ebola virus in 2014; the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) in 2015; or the Zika virus in
2016—the coronavirus has triggered an avalanche of content. Data, opinions, advice, forecasts, predictions, etc. have influenced
public opinion in different ways (Mejova & Kalimeri, 2020). This overabundance of content, called infodemics (Rothkopf, 2003; World
Health Organization, 2020), causes confusion and makes it hard for an individual to distinguish between reliable and unreliable
sources. Then, the excess information about coronavirus makes citizens especially vulnerable to hoaxes that can harm health.
In this new era of Internet hoaxes (LaGarde & Hudgins, 2018), trust and truth are now more relevant for combating falsehood than
ever before (Pal & Banerjee, 2019). MacKenzie & Bhatt (2020) say that lies are harmful “to those who have legitimate claims to know
the facts, to democracy, to anyone who values truth and honesty” (p. 12).
For that reason, Macleod (2015) holds that trust is needed in any civilization, since it has an “enormous instrumental value and [...]
intrinsic value”. Similarly, Bok (1978) already stresses that “whatever matters to human beings, trust is the atmosphere in which it
thrives” (p. 31). Therefore, it becomes imperative that future communication professionals acquire fact-checking skills that help them
identify falsehood, verify the information and report the truth.
Drawing upon the current social landscape, the present research describes a teaching experience carried out in the communication
degree programme, with the objective of raising awareness of the risks of disinformation and infodemic, as well as identifying the main
social competencies and skills related to fact-checking that students should acquire. This is based on the project-based learning (PBL)
methodology, which, according to Barrows (1986), implies that projects are used as a starting point for the acquisition and integration
of new knowledge. This teaching experience includes lecturing a fake class, in which the teacher gives a speech on coronavirus that
contains both hoaxes and true information, thus challenging students to identify false information. This fake class is the first phase of
an innovative teaching project conducted in the academic year 2020/2021, entitled Dystopian Society: a teaching innovation project in
Theory of Communication, which is transversally connected with goals 4, 10 and 16 of the Sustainable Development Goals (United
Nations, 2015). Goal 4 aims to attain quality education by “considerably increasing the number of young people and adults who have
the necessary skills, particularly technical and professional ones, to access employment, decent work and entrepreneurship” (United
Nations, 2015). Goal 10 is focused on “guaranteeing public access to information and protecting fundamental freedoms, in accordance
with national laws and international agreements” (United Nations, 2015). Finally, goal 16 supports “promoting peaceful and inclusive
societies for sustainable development, facilitating access to justice for all and creating institutions effective, responsible and inclusive
at all levels” (United Nations, 2015).
This paper is organized as follows. First, we propose a theoretical background to understand disinformation, infodemics and the
importance of fact-checking initiatives. Second, we describe the teaching experience we have conducted that considers the risks of
disinformation and infodemics for young people. Third, we explain our method to approach the objectives and research questions of
this research. Fourth, we discuss the results relating to the necessary fact-checking skills students should acquire to tackle disinfor­
mation in infodemic contexts. Finally, we present some concluding remarks, study limitations and further research issues.

2. DISINFORMATION AND INFODEMIC: THE NEW PANDEMICS

Online falsehoods have a substantial impact on public opinion and behaviours (Parkinson, 2016; Read, 2016; Dewey 2016; Allcott
& Gentzkow, 2017). For that reason, fabricated stories truly represent a global problem, which needs to be urgently addressed (Pal &

2
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

Banerjee, 2019). Fabricated stories have always existed throughout history (Moore, 2017; Edson et al., 2018); however, in recent
years, they have grown as a consequence of the new era of Internet hoaxes (LaGarde & Hudgins, 2018).
Wardle & Derakhshan (2017) claim that the concept of “fake news” is not the most accurate concept “to describe the complex
phenomena of information pollution” (p. 5). In this line of thought, various researchers (Basson, 2017; UNESCO, 2017; Wardle, 2017;
Wardle & Derakhshan, 2017; Ireton & Posetti, 2018) also sustain that this term undermines journalism and all news. For these reasons,
it is more convenient to use the three types of falseness, established by Wardle & Derakhshan (2017), to examine information disorders
(p.5):

• Misinformation occurs when false information is shared but no harm is meant.

• Disinformation is when false information is knowingly shared to cause harm.
• Malinformation is when genuine information is shared to cause harm, often by moving information designed to stay private into the
public sphere, e.g., leaks, harassment or hate speech.

Generally, disinformation may adopt any of these formats with the intention of causing harm. For that reason, the study of this
phenomenon is crucial currently; specifically, considering that digital platforms, principally social media, are the main sources of news
for a growing number of young people and the main channel through which disinformation spreads.
The Edelman barometer (2020) indicates that 54% of young people see social networks as their main source of knowledge when
seeking information about coronavirus since they mistrust traditional journalists and politicians. Today’s new generation of young
people places confidence in social platforms and social networks for being informed (Vosoughi et al., 2018). As a consequence, this new
form of information consumption (Shifman, 2013; Silverman, 2015) makes young people potentially vulnerable to hoaxes about the
coronavirus in particular and to disinformation that generally spreads on online communities.
In his mass interpersonal persuasion (MIP) theory, Fogg (2008) expresses that social networks would allow users to change be­
haviours, attitudes and opinions on a mass scale. Social networks consist of small groups that can better reach and persuade individuals
and masses. Interactions and experiences that users maintain on social networks motivate people to favour each other. For that reason,
Fogg (2008) predicts that this new phenomenon would change the future of persuasion. The launch of Facebook was the starting point
that inspired him to formulate the MIP framework, since this social platform normalized a new form of persuasion among users who
belonged to the same communities on Facebook.
Relatedly, one of the phenomena that has most influenced the massive dissemination of deceitful news is infodemics. The WHO
(World Health Organization) has recently defined infodemics as a superabundance or excess of information regarding a topic. In this
context, true content is mixed and confused with false information (WHO, 2020) so that users find it difficult to distinguish between
truth and lies. Infodemic contexts are fueled by digital communication (Rivas & Calero, 2020), which, like in an epidemic, accelerates
the spread of the virus, including hoaxes and misleading or inaccurate information. Thus, disinformation affects digital information
consumption and produces negative effects on the social behaviour of individuals (García-Marín, 2020). For this reason, disinfor­
mation spreads faster than any virus: in an increasingly globalized world and in the middle of a health crisis, this type of false content
appeals to the emotions of the audience to generate confusion, concern, fear and polarization (Herrero-Diz et al., 2020; López-Pujalte &
Nuño-Moral, 2020; Valcárcel Siso, 2020).
Drawing upon this uncertain and disorderly context, in which “information falls into one of two categories —true or false—”
(LaGarde & Hudgins, 2018, p. 29) and discerning real facts from lies is increasingly difficult, the role of communication professionals is
more essential now than ever before (Silverman, 2015). Hence, the fact-checking process not only means informing individuals but is
also a professional practice that includes monitoring, spotting and disproving disinformation in a period of infodemic.

Table 1
Typology of competencies related to the theory of communication subject.
Basic competencies (CB) CB1. Students have demonstrated that they possess and understand knowledge in an area of study that starts from the base of
general secondary education, and is usually found at a level that, although supported by advanced textbooks, also includes some
aspects that imply knowledge from the forefront of your field of study.
CB5. Students have developed those learning skills necessary to undertake further studies with a high degree of autonomy.
General competencies CG6. Diversity and interculturality: students understand and accept social and cultural diversity as a personal and collective
(CG) enriching component to develop coexistence among people without incurring discrimination based on sex, age, religion, social
status, political beliefs and/or ethnic background.
Specific competencies (CE) CE1. Students have knowledge of informative and communicative processes, as well as the main currents and theories that
formalize and criticize them from a conceptual and methodological point of view.
CE2. Students have introductory knowledge of the most characteristic methods of the social sciences.
CE3. Students have the ability to search, select and filter reliable information, as well as to contrast sources.
CE4. Students have the ability to organize complex communicative knowledge in a coherent way and its interrelation with other
social, human, and technological sciences, as well as with the methods and techniques of these disciplines.
Transversal competencies CT1. Ethical sense: students are sensitive towards the moral dimension inherent to everything human and social (personal action,
(CT) social institutions) and lean positively towards the moral good of oneself or of others (experience of meaning, fulfilment of the
person, sense of justice).

Source: author’s own based on the verification report of the communication degree programme.

3
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

3. THE DEVELOPMENT OF FACT-CHECKING SKILLS

After clarifying the disadvantages and risks of disinformation and infodemics for young people, it is important to propose solutions
that address the vulnerabilities of students. In doing so, education should be conceived as the cornerstone of this process, since young
people need to be trained in identifying disinformation and discerning falsehood from truth, regardless of whether the information
coincides with their ideology or prejudices (Van der Linden et al., 2020). Ideological polarization (Spohr, 2017) makes individuals
more defenseless and exposed to disinformation. Therefore, it is also important to teach students to find reliable scientific sources that
help them verify the information they consume, since multiple messages lack truthfulness.
Drawing upon this uncertain and disorderly context, in which discerning real facts from lies is increasingly difficult (LaGarde &
Hudgins, 2018), this research describes a teaching experience that is based on lecturing a fake class—in which the teacher gives a
speech on coronavirus that contains both disinformation and true information, thus challenging students to identify false informa­
tion—on the subject of Theory of Communication. Like other recent publications that seek to provide solutions to tackle hoaxes and to
educate about disinformation through newsgames (Roozenbeek & Van der Linden, 2019a, 2019b; García-Ortega & García-Avilés, 2020)
or other playful tools (Chang et al., 2020; Gómez-García & Carrillo-Vera, 2020), the fake class also attempts to provide future
communication professionals with the competencies outlined in Table 1.
Notwithstanding, the fake class also aims at training students in fact-checking, weighing information and being knowledgeable
online and offline. Fact-checking is a technique to fight falseness (Tandoc, 2019; Ceron et al., 2021). According to Mantzarlis (2018),
the fact-checking process is a “scrupulous analysis driven by one basic question: ‘How do we know that?’” (p. 84). Then, fact-checking
“is not spell-checking. There is not a dictionary-style guidebook with all the facts, nor a simple software that will examine documents
and flag anytime something has been misstated as fact” (Mantzarlis, 2018, p. 84).
Nonetheless, the origin of fact-checking is not the Internet, but it is rooted in the historical landscape (Fabry, 2017). In the 1930s,
some American magazines, such as Time, started hiring women for the purpose of checking the news that journalists developed before
publishing the information. In doing so, these women used different sources: The World Almanac, the Hadden’s books, dictionaries,
thesaurus, a Bible, press clippings, or even the New York Public Library. These pioneers in the field of fact-checking followed a
meticulous process: using a points and colour system, these women wrote down a point above each word after verifying the infor­
mation. Thus, red points indicate that facts have been verified by authoritative sources, such as certain reference books. Black points
represent facts that were obtained by a newspaper. Finally, red points indicate that the word or the phrase belongs to unreliable
sources. On the other hand, Dobbs (2011) and Graves & Cherubini (2016) claim that the background of this professional profile—the
fact-checker—goes back to the presidency of Ronald Reagan, when journalists began checking his speeches to identify inaccuracies.
According to the Duke Reporters’ Lab, there were 304 active fact-checking initiatives in 85 countries as of October 2020 (Stencel &
Luther, 2020). The increasing number of fact-checking projects all over the world shows the importance of debunking “widely
circulating claims online” (Tambuscio et al., 2018, p. 262). These independent fact-checking organizations explain the methodology
they follow publicly on their websites:, e.g., the Principles of the Truth-O-Metre: PolitiFact’s methodology for independent fact-checking1
section of PolitiFact (United States); the Metodología de Maldito Bulo2 section of Maldita.es (Spain); or the Che cos’è Pagella Politica?3
section of Pagella Politica (Italy), among others. At the same time, the International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) has also developed
a code of principles4 as an instrument of accountability to guide fact-checkers’ work to ensure a nonpartisan and transparent verifying
process. The implementation of the five standards included in this code will help citizens sort good fact-checking practices from bad,
unsourced, or biased fact-checking actions.
Therefore, Mantzarlis (2018) determines that fact-checking is composed of three phases (p. 85):

1 Finding fact-checkable claims by scouring through legislative records, media outlets and social media. This process includes
determining which major public claims (a) can be fact-checked and (b) ought to be fact-checked.
2 Finding the facts by looking for the best available evidence regarding the claim at hand.
3 Correcting the record by evaluating the claim in light of the evidence, usually on a scale of truthfulness.

In short, based on the literature reviewed, we have used the PBL methodology to conduct a teaching experience with the objective
of raising awareness of the risks of disinformation and infodemic, as well as identifying the main social competencies and skills related
to fact-checking that students should acquire.

4. METHODOLOGY

4.1. Design of the teaching experience: the procedure

The present study describes an innovative teaching experience that has been conducted in the communication degree programme
during the academic year 2020/2021 in two universities located in Sevilla and Córdoba (Spain). Participants were first-year high

1
Available at: https://bit.ly/3fYMycT
2
Available at: https://bit.ly/3fGLJqd
3
Available at: https://bit.ly/3p7Wa9j
4
Available at: https://bit.ly/3yO5aVD

4
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

school students enrolled in the Theory of Communication course. This innovative teaching experience is the first phase of an innovative
teaching project entitled Dystopian Society: a teaching innovation project in Theory of Communication, which investigates the risks of
disinformation and infodemics for young people.
This teaching experience has been developed through thematic-experiential classes (Crespí & García-Ramos, 2021) and the PBL
methodology. According to Barrows (1986), the PBL methodology represents a method in which projects are used as a starting point
for the acquisition and integration of new knowledge. In this way, students actively participate in higher-level cognitive processes,
such as the identification of problems; the selection, collection and discrimination of information; the understanding and interpre­
tation of data; the creation of logical relationships; and the articulation of conclusions (Suárez, 2019).
Therefore, following Crespí & García-Ramos (2021) and Barrows (1986), we designed this teaching experience as a fake class:
during a normal class session, the instructor gave a speech on coronavirus called Times of crisis, times of communication. This speech
contained both hoaxes and true information. The students were unaware of the speech could contain hoaxes, misleading content or
inaccurate information, and the teacher never disclosed to students that they were participating in a fake class. Once the instructor
finished the speech, the students were required to prepare an essay in groups of four or five individuals who summarized the main
points of the speech given by the teacher. The instructor also instructed that they should provide further and relevant information and
verify some statements before writing the essay.
Thus, the objective of this fake class was to challenge students to identify falsehood and recognized truth. At the same time, the
results of this experience were expected to lead to determining the main social competencies (UNESCO, 2005; Ananiadou & Mag­
dalean, 2009; Silva et al., 2016) and skills related to fact-checking that students should acquire. To do this, the fake class recreated an
infodemic environment by the use of information, claims, news and statements about the COVID-19. In the same way that users are
exposed to an overabundance of information on the digital realm, students were subjected to a great amount of content that was
supposed to be truth—since the speech was given in a trusted teacher-learner atmosphere (Fogg, 2008)—during the fake class. In this
way, identifying and distinguishing true messages from false or misleading content is difficult for students.
Regarding the hoaxes, misleading contents or inaccurate information spread on the fake class, it is important to point out that these
contents were selected based on thematic criteria (Table 2):
Hoaxes related to the causes of the coronavirus included the claim from Nobel Prize in Medicine recipient, Tasuku Honjo, that
COVID-19 has an artificial origin. The impact thematic criteria were centred on emphasizing the consequences of the virus, e.g., Spain
was the country with the highest number of deaths per 100,000 inhabitants worldwide. Misleading content that create polarizations
were intended to widen the existing gap between immigrants, for example, by spreading hoaxes that affirmed that foreign­
ers—specifically people from undeveloped countries—were responsible for expanding the virus throughout the Mediterranean
countries. Finally, when spreading false information about super remedies that fight or prevent the virus, we included topics such as, for
example, that hot drinks supposedly prevent coronavirus infection.

4.2. Objective and research questions

The main objective of this study is to describe a teaching experience carried out in the communication degree programme, with the
aims of raising awareness of the risks of disinformation and infodemic, as well as identifying the main social competencies and skills
related to fact-checking that students should acquire. Based on thematic-experiential classes (Crespí & García-Ramos, 2021) and the
PBL methodology, this teaching experience consisted of lecturing a fake class in which the instructor gave a speech on coronavirus that
contained both hoaxes and true information, thus challenging students to identify false information.
Thus, the following research questions are examined:

RQ1. What are the most influential hoaxes about the coronavirus?
RQ2. How do student response in infodemic contexts?
RQ3. What are the main fact-checking skills that students of communication degrees should acquire to tackle disinformation
currently?

In the next section, we will answer these research questions by describing the results obtained through the proposed method.

4.3. Participants

The current study is part of an innovative teaching project conducted in the academic year 2020/2021, entitled Dystopian Society: a

Table 2
Classification of hoaxes about coronavirus following thematic criteria
THEMATIC CRITERIA DEFINITION

Causes False information about the origin of the virus.

Impact False information about actions, events, or activities that happen as a consequence of the virus.
Polarization False information that exacerbates the differences between social groups due to issues like gender, ethnicity, hierarchy, etc.
Super-remedies False information about miracle drugs, solutions, panaceas or antidotes that help fight the virus or prevent the virus.

Source: author’s own.

5
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

teaching innovation project in Theory of Communication, which investigates the risks of disinformation and infodemics for young people.
Participants were first-year high school students recruited from two universities located in Sevilla and Córdoba (Spain). The un­
dergraduates who engaged in this experiment were attending lessons on Theory of Communication. A total of N = 150 students, ranging
from 18 to 31 years of age, were enrolled in this teaching experience. There were 87 females (58%) and 63 males (42%). Therefore, the
sample of this study is nonprobabilistic and casual. The participation rate was 100% of the students enrolled in the Theory of
Communication course.
The students were distributed in working groups made up of four or five individuals. Each working group was expected to develop
an essay that summarized the main ideas of the speech given in the fake class. González-Geraldo et al. (2021) refer to this methodology
as a student-centred teaching strategy in which one student plays a leading role and guides other members to change their way of
thinking. Suarez (2019) also reinforces that the creation of working groups favours students participating actively in higher-level
cognitive processes. This project was approved by the Ethics Committee of Loyola University in 2020.

4.4. Method

The study adopted a qualitative methodology to gather beliefs, motivations or attitudes of the participants of this innovative
teaching project (Aranda & Araújo, 2009). Based on the main objective of our study, we have developed applied and cross-sectional
research with the aim of describing the teaching experience—the fake class—conducted in the classroom and in the communication
degree programme. This application-oriented research defines an educational practice and represents an idiographic investigation
because it starts from the particular and then studies the uniqueness of the educational phenomena (Arnal, 1994).

5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results obtained in this study are divided into three parts, each of which is oriented to answer a research question. The first part
is focused on identifying the most influential hoaxes about the coronavirus that young people have embraced as reliable information
during the 2020 pandemic (RQ1). The second part is dedicated to explaining students’ responses when they are involved in infodemic
contexts. At the same time, we also point out the main challenge that arose in a period of infodemic, such as the one created during the
coronavirus heath crisis (RQ2). In the third and last part, we propose the main fact-checking skills that students should acquire to
tackle disinformation in a period of infodemics (RQ3).

5.1. The most influential hoaxes about the coronavirus

To address RQ1, we first present our results related to the most influential hoaxes about the coronavirus for students. The obtained
findings show that in 83.33% of cases, students believed the information given in the speech during the fake class. In only 16.6% of
cases, undergraduates verified the overabundance of contents provided in the fake class and were able to sort falseness from truth.
When analysing essay writing by 83.33% of students (Figure 1), we found that the most influential hoaxes that inspired more
credibility among students were related to the impact of the coronavirus (51.07%). This finding seems to be a logical consequence in a

Figure 1. Most influential hoaxes about coronavirus

Source: author’s own.

6
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

health crisis context because, as Chua and Banerjee (2018) and Zannettou et al. (2019) stated, this kind of disinformation seeks to
create social panic; these kinds of hoaxes trigger fear and confusion among citizens. Thus, individuals feel a strong urge to alarm,
frighten and warn other people.
Disinformation about the causes of the coronavirus also achieved a high incidence rate among students (31.9%). These kinds of
hoaxes stimulate feelings such as anger or outrage and sow confusion by disseminating conspiracy theories, statements without any
scientific justification, and baseless claims.
Students accepted and believed hoaxes that created polarization as well (12.78%). The phenomenon of polarization aims to increase
the gap between people for many reasons: skin colour, race, social class, ethnicity, political ideology, etc. The coronavirus has set up
the ideal scenario for exacerbating these existing differences, e.g., by maintaining that immigrants or women who were in the 8-M
protest spread the virus in Europe or by repeating that politicians and members of the royal family were receiving personalized
health care at home to avoid going to the hospital. This social landscape favours the spread of controversial statements and hinders the
possibility of finding spaces for dialogue, consensus and moderated opinions. Although disinformation and polarization have always
existed throughout history, the level of polarization currently is worryingly high as a consequence of the nature of social media and
other digital platforms. Multiple authors (Garrett, 2009; Iyengar & Hahn, 2009; Sunstein, 2009; Munson & Resnick, 2010; Pariser,
2011; Bakshy et al., 2015; Gentzkow, Shapiro & Stone, 2016; Flaxman et al., 2016) have already warned that digital scenarios could

Table 3
Fact-checking skills within the context of social competencies.
SOCIAL COMPETENCIES FACT-CHECKING SKILLS

Using information and communication technologies as tools for expression and 1. Use and mastery of technological means.
communication, for access to information sources, as a means of archiving data and 2. Expression in the media without grammatical or spelling errors.
documents to create content, for presentation tasks, for learning, research and 3. Analysis of information sources.
cooperative work. 4. Ability to generate audiovisual content.
5. Management of computer tools.
6. Strengthening of research knowledge and skills.
7. Capacity for collaboration, cooperation and connectivity.
8. Manipulative skills and simultaneous tasks.
9. Information search and analysis skills.
10. Improvement and development of receptive communication.
Ability to integrate knowledge and face the complexity of formulating judgements based on 11. Cognitive reflection.
information that, being incomplete or limited, includes reflections and decision-making 12. Assertiveness and empathy.
based on evidence and arguments related to the application of their knowledge and 13. Have an ethical and responsible attitude of respect for people
judgements; respecting the data, its veracity and the ethical criteria associated with and the environment, with responsible consumption.
science. 14. Interpretation, argumentation and problem solving.
15. Decision-making capacity.
16. Social responsibility.
17. Respect the fundamental rights and equality between men and
women.
18. Increased selective attention and mental alertness.
19. Do not incite hatred, racism, homophobia, etc.
20. Rejection in the face of hoaxes.
21. Ensure the veracity of the data.
22. Information contrast.
Ability to think and act according to universal principles that are based on the value of the 23. Thought and critical reasoning both deductive and inductive.
person, the cultural heritage and are aimed at the full personal, social and professional 24. Participation and social gathering.
development of the students. 25. Being able to integrate and work efficiently in multidisciplinary
teams assuming different roles and responsibilities.
26. Flexibility and/or adaptability.
27. Integrity and value of the performance of the professional
activity.
28. Tolerance to stress.
29. Self-employment.
Demonstrate a mental behaviour that questions things and is interested in the foundations 30. Initiative capacity in analysis, planning, organization and
on which ideas, values, actions and judgements are based. Promote the capacity for management.
initiative in analysis, planning, organization and management. Act in a creative, 31. Creativity.
proactive, entrepreneurial and innovative. 32. Motivation for achievement.
33. Initiative and leadership.
34. Fostering the imagination.
35. Development of innovative capacity.
36. Independent learning.
37. Identify, practice and project proactive competition.
Present their knowledge in all areas of knowledge, in a clear and unambiguous way, 38. Retention and synthesis capacity.
showing interest in interacting with others. That they have the ability to maintain a 39. Teamwork.
critical and constructive dialogue, as well as to speak in public if necessary. 40. Social responsibility.
41. Dialogue critically and constructively.
42. Ability to interpret, argue and solve problems.
43. Self-confidence.

Source: author’s own.

7
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

bring the risk of incremental segregation in online consumption, which deepens the ideological distance between individuals.
Finally, disinformation related to super remedies inspired little confidence among undergraduates (4.25%). These sort of hoaxes
provoke calm and serenity. Zannettou et al. (2019) argued that this content tends to succeed when they are shared in trusted envi­
ronments, such as social networks (Fogg, 2008), where users do not question the advice and experiences given by other users of the
same community. Thus, the classroom may not be the ideal environment for spreading information related to super remedies against
coronavirus. Although the university represents a trusted atmosphere, students did not trust this content, and therefore, hoaxes related
to super remedies do not succeed in inspiring credibility in the same way as when they are shared on the Internet.

5.2. Students’ response in a period of infodemic

This teaching experience shows that hoaxes go unnoticed by students when disinformation is spread in the classroom (RQ2). As
with any social network in which users interact with other trustworthy individuals of the same community, universities also represent
an environment of trust and security for most undergraduates. For that reason, students do not question the claims or statements
shared by the instructor or by other students. As a consequence, it can be easy for students to believe lies or inaccurate information,
since they do not feel the need to fact-check messages that are spread in an atmosphere of trust, such as a college classroom.
Participants of the fake class experienced the phenomenon of disinformation and understood that believing in hoaxes could have
serious consequences. In the case of this teaching experience, students who did not verify information given in the speech and that
included hoaxes or inaccurate information on their essays failed the task. Based on these results, the need to describe the fact-checking
skills that students should acquire arises. Undergraduates are not aware they are vulnerable to hoaxes. Only when they experience the
phenomenon of disinformation do they recognize the risks that false information implies.
Therefore, following Fogg’s (2008) framework, interactions and experiences that individuals maintain in the university or in the
classroom favour that students persuade other students, as well as change behaviours, attitudes and opinions on a mass scale. In these
offline spaces, people influence each other and contribute to creating infodemic contexts that have a pernicious effect on the
knowledge, competences and skills of students.

5.3. Fact-checking skills within the framework of social competencies

Drawing upon Mantzarlis’ (2018) proposal, the assessment framework of Ravitz (2014), the methodology followed by the
fact-checking initiatives included in the Duke Reporters’ Lab, and in light of the results obtained in the fake class, we have developed a
more detailed taxonomy (Table 3) in which we indicate the fact-checking skills that students, as emerging Communication pro­
fessionals, should acquire (RQ3) within the framework of the necessary social competencies in the 21st century (UNESCO, 2005;
Ananiadou & Magdalean, 2009; Silva et al., 2016) for solving real problems (INTEF, 2019).
These social competencies are directly or indirectly presented in fact-checking skills and favour the acquisition of academic
competencies during the teaching-learning process. Although this teaching experience aims to identify the main social competencies
and skills related to fact-checking that students should acquire, it becomes clear that there are also other academic competencies that
students have acquired once the subject of theory of communication ends.
Basic competencies—CB1 and CB5 —are not worthwhile because they are common to all undergraduates, and students acquire
them by finishing their degree. General competencies—CG6—are specific to students at the communication degree programme and,
for that reason, relate to multiple social competencies, such as understanding the environment (Higuita, 2019) or the promotion of
assertiveness, empathy and social responsibility (Manzano-León et al., 2020).
Specific competencies—CE1, CE2, CE3 and CE4—are focused on raising awareness of the risks of disinformation and infodemic;
promoting the capacity for collaboration, cooperation and connectivity (Martínez, 2019; Technologic de Monterrey, 2016); bolstering
the search and analysis of information (González-Vásquez & Igartua, 2018); boosting the ability to express themselves appropriately in
research; and encouraging the capacity for content verification, analysis of current reality, and critical thinking and reasoning
(Martínez, 2019), among others. Finally, as a response to the European Higher Education Area (EHEA) and concerning the importance
of building soft skills (Crespí & García-Ramos, 2021), transversal competencies —CT1—are developed in the university in which the
fake class was carried out and are oriented towards achieving the SDGs (Sustainable Development Goals), in particular, the Goals 4, 10
and 16. These goals promote the achievement of the following social competencies: initiative and leadership (Lobacheva, 2019);
motivation to become a trusted and fair journalist (Manzano-León et al., 2020); respect for fundamental human rights and equality
between men and women (Zamora-Polo et al., 2019); and the trustworthiness of oneself (Goleman, 2010), in line with fidelity to the
values and beliefs that condition the behaviour of future journalists.

6. LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH

The current study has a number of limitations. First, there were no comparisons to a control group, so it was difficult to draw
informative conclusions. Second, in relation to the obtained findings, it should be noted that this research provides the foundation for
further studies that aim to examine the relationships between social competencies and fact-checking skills. Clearly, further studies are
required to test all these proposals.
Third, the current sample was drawn from university classrooms in Sevilla and Córdoba (Spain). It is not clear to what extent the
teaching-learning process involved in the study—through thematic-experiential classes (Crespí & García-Ramos, 2021) and the PBL
methodology—influenced the current results. Given the wide variety of high school pedagogies across the world, caution is warranted

8
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

when generalizing the findings. Finally, as a transversal purpose of this study, we aim to provide teachers with guidance for reinforcing
certain skills and competencies when designing syllabuses and rubrics to assess the development of undergraduates in communication.

7. CONCLUSIONS

The present study provides a first in-depth analysis of fact-checking skills within the framework of social competencies. The
teaching experience described in this research sheds light on the need to adapt the existing pedagogy methods to the 4.0 environment,
to implement a more active teaching process in university classrooms and to popularize the use of more functional, helpful and
motivating means, such as digital resources. Although the global health crisis caused by the coronavirus has pushed students and
instructors to virtual classrooms, multiple experts indicate that this pedagogical model will remain with us even after the crisis.
University students are increasingly involved in the processes of autonomous learning and collaboration, thus requiring active
methodologies to facilitate the integration of social networks with the academic curriculum (Schworm & Gruber, 2012).
As Echevarria (2000) points out, new technology establishes a new social space, called a third environment, that is clearly different
from natural and urban environments and represents a significant and irreversible change in human history (Arras-Vota et al., 2021).
For this reason, in a hypermedia society, where textbook learning is becoming increasingly less popular, instructors should start using
social networks to promote ideas, knowledge and experience as long as young people are familiarized with these online platforms.
Moreover, through methodologies related to emerging pedagogies, such as PBL, the educational process may be reinforced by pro­
moting methodologies linked to emerging pedagogies that reinforce the educational process by promoting lifelong learning technology
and open educational resources in hypermediated communication networks (Aparicio-Gómez & Ostos-Ortiz, 2021). Relatedly,
following the results obtained in other studies (Aguaded et al., 2013; Vázquez-Cano et al., 2013; Vázquez-Cano et al., 2014;
López-Meneses, 2020), the use of digital resources in university contexts enhances the spread of knowledge on a massive scale, fosters
collective reflection, and provides didactic resources for educational research. All these effects are key factors in the development of
social competencies among undergraduates since they encourage students to have a positive impact on our society.
Finally, drawing upon the findings of the present study, which are the result of a teaching experience with the aim of identifying the
main fact-checking skills that students should acquire, the fake class represents a potential method to raise awareness of the risks of
disinformation and infodemic, as well as to help future communication students develop the needed social competences in today’s
society (APM, 2019).

Supplementary materials

Supplementary material associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100887.

REFERENCES

Acedo, M. A., & Ruiz-Cabestre, F. J. (2011). An experience on autonomous or participatory evaluation: self-evaluation and peer evaluation. ARBOR. Science, Thought,
Culture, 187(3), 183–188.
Aguaded, J. I., López-Meneses, E., & Jaén, A. (2013). University electronic portfolios for a new higher education methodology. Development of a multimedia
educational material (MEM). RABBR University and Knowledge Society (RUSC), 10(1), 7–28.
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/
jep.31.2.211.
Ananiadou, K., & Magdalean, C. (2009). 21st Century Skills & Competences for New Millennium Learners in OECD Countries. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/
218525261154.
Aparicio-Gómez, O. Y., & Ostos-Ortiz, O. L. (2021). Emerging pedagogies in virtual learning environments. Journal International Pedagogy and Educational Innovation, 1
(1), 11–36.
APM. (2019). Annual Report of the Journalistic Profession 2019. APM. https://bit.ly/317oOwu.
Aranda, T., & Araújo, E. G. (2009). Técnicas e instrumentos cualitativos de recogida de datos (p. 284). Editorial EOS.
Arnal, J. L. (1994). Investigación educativa: fundamentos y metodologías. Barcelona: Editorial Labor.
Arras-Vota, A. M., Bordas-Beltrán, J. L., Porras-Flores, D. A., & Gómez-Ramírez, J. I. (2021). Information and communication technology skills. Case studies:
Universidad Santo Tomas (Colombia) and Universidad Autónoma de Chihuahua (Mexico). University training, 14(1), 135–146.
Barrows, H. S. (1986). A Taxonomy of problem-based learning methods. Medical Education, 20, 481–486.
Bakshy, E., Messing, S., & Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science, 348(6239), 1130–1132, 10.1126/science.
aaa1160.
Basson, A. (2017). If it’s fake, it’s not news. July 6. News24 https://bit.ly/2RZHHwZ.
Batistello, P., & Pereira, A. T. C. (2019). Competency-based learning and active methodologies: applying gamification. Scientific Journal of Architecture and Urbanism,
40(2), 31–42. https://bit.ly/3pufPQk.
Bok, S. (1978). Lying: moral choice in public and private life. New York: Vintage.
Ceron, W., De-Lima-Santos, M. F., & Quilesa, M. G. (2021). Fake news agenda in the era of COVID-19: Identifying trends through fact-checking content. Online Social
Networks and Media, 21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.osnem.2020.100116.
Chang, Y. K., Literat, I., Price, C., Eisman, J . I., Gardner, J., Chapman, A., & Truss, A. (2020). News literacy education in a polarized political climate: how games can teach
youth to spot misinformation. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. https://bit.ly/2XdHgkS.
Chua, A., & Banerjee, S. (2018). Intentions to trust and share online health rumors: An experiment with medical professionals. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 1–9.
Crespí, P., & García-Ramos, J. M. (2021). Generic skills at university. Evaluation of a training program. Education XX1, 24(1), 297–327. http://doi.org/10.5944/
educXX1.26846.
Dewey, C. (2016). Facebook Fake-News Writer: ‘I Think Donald Trump is in the White House because of Me. Washington Post. https://wapo.st/3bhohLN.
Dobbs, M. (2011). The Rise of Political How Reagan Inspired a Journalistic Movement : A Reporter’s Eye View. Washington, DC: New America Foundation. https://bit.ly/
3bl7cAI.

9
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

Echevarría, J. (2000). The domestic revolution brings the world at home through new technologies. Consumer, 29.
Edelman, R. (2020). 2020 Edelman Trust Barometer: Special Report Trust and the Coronavirus. Edelman.com. https://bit.ly/39eDHOG.
Edson, C., Tandoc, Jr., Zheng, W. L., Richard, L:, et al. (2018). Defining “Fake News”. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/
21670811.2017.1360143.
Fabry, M. (2017). Here’s How the First Fact-Checkers Were Able to Do Their Jobs Before the Internet. August 24. Time https://bit.ly/35FEdnA.
Fernández-Arias, P., Ordóñez-Olmedo, E., Vergara-Rodríguez, D., & Gómez- Vallecillo, A. I. (2020). The gamification as a technique for acquiring social skills. Journal
Prisma Social, (31), 388–409. https://bit.ly/3iea9ZR.
Flaxman, S., Goel, S., & Rao, J. M. (2016). Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly, 80(S1), 298–320. https://doi.org/
10.1093/poq/nfw006.
Flores-Vivar, J. M., & López-López, P. J. (2020). Radiography of data journalism in Spanish Communication schools: innovating undergraduate studies in Journalism.
Anàlisi, 62, 77–92.
Fogg, B. J. (2008). Mass interpersonal persuation: An early view of a new phenomenon. In H. Oinas-Kukkonen, P. Hasle, M. Harjumaa, K. Segerståhl, & P. Øhrstrøm
(Eds.), Proceedings Of Persuasive Technology: Third Internacional Conference (pp. 23–34). Berlin: Springer.
García-Marín, D. (2020). Global infodemic. Informational disorders, fake narratives and fact-checking in the Covid-19 crisis. El profesional de la información, 29(4).
https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.jul.11.
García-Ortega, A., & García-Avilés, J. A. (2020). Use of playful design to combat misinformation: news games as a tool for raising awareness about hoaxes. Icono, 14
(1), 179–204. 1910.7195/ri14.v19i1.1598.
Garrett, R. K. (2009). Echo Chambers Online? Politically Motivated Selective Exposure among Internet News Users. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14
(2), 265–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01440.x.
Gentzkow, M., Shapiro, J. M. & Stone, D. F (2016). Media Bias in the Marketplace: Theory. In S. Anderson, J. Waldofgel & D. Stromberg (eds.), Handbook of Media
Economics, vol. 1B (pp.623-645). Oxford: Elsevier.
Goleman, D. (2010). La práctica de la inteligencia emocional. Kairós.
Gómez-García, S., & Carrillo-Vera, J. A. (2020). The discourse of news games in the face of fake news and disinformation: media culture and digital literacy. Prisma
Social, (30), 22–46.
González, J., & Wagenaar, R. (2006). Tuning Educational Structures in Europe II. The contribution of universities to the Bologna Process. University of Deusto. https://bit.ly/
3fNCTqy.
González-Geraldo, J. L., Monroy, F., & Del Rincón, B. (2021). Impact of a Spanish university teacher development program on teaching approaches. Psychometric
properties of the S-ATI-20 scale. Education XX1, 24(1), 213–232. http://doi.org/10.5944/educXX1.26725.
González-Vázquez, J., & Igartua, J. (2018). ¿Por qué los adolescentes juegan videojuegos? Propuesta de una escala de motivos para jugar videojuegos a partir de la
teoría de usos y gratificaciones. Cuadernos.info, 42, 135–146. https://doi.org/10.7764/cdi.42.1314.
Graves, L., & Cherubini, F. (2016). The rise of fact-checking sites in Europe. Digital News Publication. https://bit.ly/389KzNw.
Herrero-Diz, P., Pérez-Escolar, M., & Plaza Sánchez, J. (2020). Desinformación de género: análisis de los bulos de Maldito Feminismo. Revista ICONO14, 18(2),
188–216. https://doi.org/10.7195/ri14.v18i2.1509.
Herrero-Diz, P., & Varona Aramburu, D. (2017). The first round the multimedia world: Teaching Digital Journalism through collaborative project-based learning.
Textual & Visual Media, (10), 205–218.
Higuita, M. C. (2019). The comprehensive use of scientific knowledge through gamification in the classroom. Institutional Repository UN. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2018.05.021 [master’s thesis, Universidad Nacional de Colombia]https://doi.org/.
INTEF (2019, September 19). Resumen del Informe Horizon 2019. https://bit.ly/3ieYycM.
Ireton, C., & Posetti, J. (2018). Journalism, ‘Fake news’ & Disinformation. Handbook for Journalism Education and Training. Paris, France: UNESCO Series on Journalism
Education. https://bit.ly/2GVAYxM.
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009). Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use. Journal of Communication, 59(1), 19–39. https://doi.org/
10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x.
LaGarde, J., & Hudgins, D. (2018). Fact vs. fiction: Teaching critical thinking skills in the age of fake news. Portland, Oregon: International Society for Technology in
Education.
López-Meneses, E. (2020). Information and communication technologies in university praxis. Octaedro Editions.
López-Pujalte, C., & Nuño-Moral, M. V. (2020). La “infodemia” en la crisis del coronavirus: Análisis de desinformaciones en España y Latinoamérica. Revista Española
De Documentación Científica, (3), 43. https://doi.org/10.3989/redc.2020.3.1807.
Mantzarlis, A. (2018). Fact-checking 101. In C. Ireton & J. Posetti (eds.), Journalism, ‘Fake News’ & Disinformation. Handbook for Journalism Education and Training
(pp.81-95). UNESCO. https://bit.ly/3fX6PiV.
Manzano-León, A., Sánchez-Sánchez, M., Trigueros-Ramos, R., Álvarez- Hernández, J., & Aguilar-Parra, J. M. (2020). Gamification and Breakout Edu in Professional
Training. The «Gray Place» program in Social Integration. EDMETIC, 9(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.21071/edmetic.v9i1.12067.
MacKenzie, A., & Bhatt, I. (2020). Lies, Bullshit and Fake News: Some Epistemological Concerns. Postdigital Science and Education, 2(1), 9–13. https://doi.org/
10.1007/s42438-018-0025-4.
MacLeod, C. (2015). Trust. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. https://stanford.io/2HaUVRB.
Mejova, Y. & Kalimeri, K. (2020). Advertisers Jump on Coronavirus Bandwagon: Politics, News, and Business. https://bit.ly/34dpsZw.
Moore, M. (2017). Inquiry into Fake News. London: King’s College London’s Centre for the Study of Media, Communication and Power. https://bit.ly/2SlDsuM.
Martínez, J. E. (2019). El potencial del aprendizaje cooperativo y la educación para la paz para promover competencias sociales en la educación superior. REIDICS.
Revista de Investigación en Didáctica de las Ciencias Sociales, 4, 42–59. https://doi.org/10.17398/2531-0968.04.42.
Munson, S. A., & Resnick, P. (2010). Presenting Diverse Political Opinions: How and How Much. In Proceedings of the Sigchi Conference on Human Factors in Computing
Systems (pp. 1457–1466).
Ordóñez-Olmedo, E. (2017). Teaching Innovation Proposal: The inclusion of transversal competences in official university master’s degrees and the strengthening of
democratic values. International Journal of Educational Research and Innovation (IJERI), 8, 148–162. https://bit.ly/2UmlNEO.
Pal, A. & Banerjee, S. (2019). Understanding online falsehood from the perspective of social problem. In I. E. Chiluwa & S. A. Samoilenko (eds.), Handbook of Research
on Deception, Fake News, and Misinformation Online (pp. 1-17). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You. London: Penguin UK.
Parkinson, H. J. (2016). Click and Elect: How Fake News Helped Donald Trump Win a Real Election. November 14. The Guardian https://bit.ly/2H676yN.
Ravitz, J. (2014). A survey for measuring 21st century teaching and learning: West Virginia 21st Century Teaching and Learning Survey [WVDE-CIS-28]. https://bit.ly/
3chWf58.
Read, M. (2016). Donald Trump Won because of Facebook. November 9. New York Magazine https://nym.ag/387wXTc.
Rivas, M. M., & Calero, M. L. (2020). Pandemic and post- truth: the impact of COVID-19 on WhatsApp communication. Prisma Social, (31), 110–154. https://bit.ly/
3nnBCHA.
Roncancio-Ortiz, A. P., Ortiz-Carrera, M. F., Llano-Ruiz, H., Malpica-López, M. J., & Bocanegra- García, J. J. (2017). The use of video games as a didactic tool to
improve teaching-learning: a review of the state of the subject. Engineering Research and Development, 17(2), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.19053/1900771X.v17.
n2.2017.7184.
Roozenbeek, J., & Van Der Linden, S. (2019a). The fake news game: actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation. Journal of Risk Research, 22(5), 570–580.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491.
Roozenbeek, J., & Van Der Linden, S. (2019b). Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 1–10.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491.
Rothkopf, D. (2003). When the Buzz Bites Back. The Washington Post. https://wapo.st/2xUFETk.

10
M. Pérez-Escolar et al. Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (2021) 100887

Schworm, S., & Gruber, H. (2012). E-Learning in universities: Supporting help- seeking processes by instructional prompts. British Journal of Educational Technology,
43, 272–281.
Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in a digital world: Reconciling with a conceptual troublemaker. Journal of Computer Mediated Behavior, 18(3), 362–377.
Silva, M., García, T., Guzmán, T., & Chaparro, R. (2016). Study of Moodle tools to develop 21st century skills. Virtual Campus, 5(2), 58–69.
Silverman, C. (2015). Lies, damn lies, and viral content. How news websites spread (and debunk) online rumors, unverified claims, and misinformation. Columbia University:
Tow Center for Digital Journalism. https://doi.org/10.7916/D8Q81RHH.
Spohr, D. (2017). Fake news and ideological polarization: Filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34(3), 150–160. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0266382117722446.
Stencel, M., & Luther, J. (2020). Fact-checking count tops 300 for the first time. October 13. Duke Reporter’s Lab. https://bit.ly/3uzB0C9.
Suárez, R. (2019). Aprendizaje significativo y basado en proyectos colaborativos para la adquisición de competencias profesionales en el grado de periodismo. In M. C.
Pérez-Fuentes (ed). Innovación docente e investigación en Educación y Ciencias Sociales. (pp. 121-132). Dykinson.
Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Tambuscio, M., Oliveira, D. F. M., Ciampaglia, G. L., & Ruffo, G. (2018). Network segregation in a model of misinformation and fact-checking. Journal of Computational
Social Science, 1(2), 261–275.
Tandoc, E. C. (2019). The facts of fake news: A research review. Sociology Compass, 13(9). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12724.
UNESCO (2005). Towards the Knowledge Society. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. https://bit.ly/3kVa381.
UNESCO (2017, November 15). Solving “fake news” starts with avoiding the term. https://bit.ly/3bgldzp.
United Nations (2015, September 25). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://bit.ly/3igqZHw.
Valcárcel Siso, R. L. (2020). Fact Check in Times of Coronavirus. From the pandemic to the infodemic. Journal of Learning Styles, 13(26), 61–72.
Van der Linden, S., Panagopoulos, C., & Roozenbeek, J. (2020). You are fake news: political bias in perceptions of fake news. Media. Culture & Society, 42(3), 460–470.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720906992.
Van der Wende, M. C. (2000). The Bologna Declaration: Enhancing the transparency and competitiveness of European higher education. Journal of Studies in
International Education,, 4(2), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/102831530000400202.
Vázquez-Cano, E., López Meneses, E., & Fernández Márquez, E. (2013). Concept mapping for developing competencies in European higher education area.
International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 3(17), 7–18.
Vázquez-Cano, E., Martín-Monje, E., & Fernández-Álvarez, M. (2014). The role of e-rubrics in the evaluation of digital materials for teaching languages in virtual
learning environments. REDU. Journal of university teaching, 12(1), 135–157.
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.
Wardle, C., & February 16. (2017). Fake news. It’s complicated. First Draft. https://bit.ly/387UN1a.
Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder. Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking. Strasbourg: Council of Europe. https://
bit.ly/2OsHEHY.
World Health Organization. (2020, January 23). Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV): situation report, 3. https://bit.ly/3bYve3M.
Zamora-Polo, F., Corrales-Serrano, M., Sánchez-Martín, J., & Espejo-Antúnez, L. (2019). Nonscientific University Students Training in General Science Using an
Active-Learning Merged Pedagogy: Gamification in a Flipped Classroom. Education Sciences, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9040297.
Zannettou, S., Sirivianos, M., Blackburn, J., & Kourtellis, N. (2019). The web of false information: Rumors, fake news, hoaxes, clickbait, and various other
shenanigans. Journal of Data and Information Quality (JDIQ), 11(3), 1–37. https://bit.ly/3nlh2rj.
Technologic de Monterrey (2016, September). Edu Trends | Gamificación. Observatorio en innovación educativa. Gamificación. Universidad ICESI., (2016).

11