  When users on social media share content without considering its veracity,
they may unwittingly be spreading misinformation. In this work, we investigate
the design of lightweight interventions that nudge users to assess the accuracy
of information as they share it. Such assessment may deter users from posting
misinformation in the first place, and their assessments may also provide
useful guidance to friends aiming to assess those posts themselves. In support
of lightweight assessment, we first develop a taxonomy of the reasons why
people believe a news claim is or is not true; this taxonomy yields a checklist
that can be used at posting time. We conduct evaluations to demonstrate that
the checklist is an accurate and comprehensive encapsulation of people's
free-response rationales. In a second experiment, we study the effects of three
behavioral nudges -- 1) checkboxes indicating whether headings are accurate, 2)
tagging reasons (from our taxonomy) that a post is accurate via a checklist and
3) providing free-text rationales for why a headline is or is not accurate --
on people's intention of sharing the headline on social media. From an
experiment with 1668 participants, we find that both providing accuracy
assessment and rationale reduce the sharing of false content. They also reduce
the sharing of true content, but to a lesser degree that yields an overall
decrease in the fraction of shared content that is false. Our findings have
implications for designing social media and news sharing platforms that draw
from richer signals of content credibility contributed by users. In addition,
our validated taxonomy can be used by platforms and researchers as a way to
gather rationales in an easier fashion than free-response.
