INFORMATION ABOUT INFORMATION

Now we can build the algorithm of action to get rid of low-quality information. Having received the information, you must, first, check it for the signs of low-quality information. Secondly, if there are no signs you must think about the existence of the opportunities of low-quality information arising (OLQIA). If you have concluded such opportunity exists, i.e. there is suspicion the piece of information may be low-quality (say, the employee who was late was lying earlier, and there is penalty for being late) or there are signs of the existing if low-quality information, then you need to check the information received using 4 methods of checking information for quality. Here are these methods.

The Method of Metainforming.

This method is based on the use of Metainforming for detecting of low-quality informations, which consist in finding information (s) comparing with them the original information (s) you can get one of the two metainformations: -

• the original information is quality information;

• the original information is low-quality information.

Metainforming can be carried out both by the recipient of the information (comparison of the received information with own ideas or other informations), and with the help of other people including the source of information (for example, when the contradictory informations supplied by him is indicated, and he begin to search).

It is important to remember that in case if all compared informations turns out to be equally low quality, then metainforming will not allow us to discover the received (original) information is of low or high quality. For example, if a manager needs to verify the information by comparing it with information from other sources, and these sources provide to him with equally low-quality information (say, by colluding) then the metainformation that the manager comes to (the original information was of high quality will be metadisinformation.

Thus, when we use metainformation to verify information, it is necessary that at least one from the compared informations is quality information. 

Confidence that information is quality information is based on the thrust in the methods of obtaining information and/or in source of this information. Thrust in the source of information, in turn, is based on:

1. the absence of goals that can lead to the delivery of low-quality information;

2. the facts of delivery of quality information in the past (reputation), or on the moral and psychological qualities of the source of information that inspire thrust;

3. the analysis of source’s ability to access to information. Here we mean the access in the broad sense of the word – not only in terms of permission to possess this or that information, but also the ability to possess the quality information due to one’s professional duties and personal interests. For example, in one of the economic articles, the author of this article based his reasoning on the fact that the credit issue of the National Bank increased significantly over the month. At the same time, if statistic for the month plus one day were used the growth in credit issue would not be so significant. However, the author couldn’t have such information due to his professional duties, i.e. he had no access to this information;

4. on the sufficiency of the competence and responsibility of the information provider;  

5. whether the information source is the original source.

If there is no such certainty, it is necessary to use double metainforming or (meta-metainforming) or others methods for identification of low-quality information.

Let us, however, highlight one more indirect way of using metainforming, when it is difficult or impossible to single out one of the informations as reliable (standard). This is an assessment of the independence of information sources. In more details if the same information obtained from several sources and these sources are independent we can speak with greater confidence about the quality of the original information. The more such sources the better. It is important to exclude or minimize the possibility that these sources draw information from each other.

Note that the above shows why reputation is so important.

If we analyze a specific example with American energy giant “Enron” where the management colluded with the audit company and distorted the organization’s financial statement, then in this case there were two possibilities for the appearance of low-quality information.

1. The management was interested in inflating profit in order to maintain the share price and thereby to preserve their jobs (bonuses), which differed from the goal of shareholders – to have the objective picture of company activity in order to make decisions adequate to the situation. Thus, the goal of the information provider differed from the goal of information recipient.

2. The lack of the verification of information by the shareholders, which was due to the fact that the audit company was chosen by firm’s management not the shareholders.

Ultimately the intentional reason for the providing of low-quality information to the counterparties was the mismatch between the goals of information provider (management) and recipient (shareholders, public).

The Method of Detailing.         

Method of Detaling is the acquisition of detailed informations. This method is used to verify the provided generalized informations.

Let’s consider the example given above for the illustration of the wrong generalized information (the example from the book of Helga Drammond “Effective decision making”), which deals with the message of British Air Force during Operation Desert Storm about successful bombing run – 80% of the targets were hit. In this case disinformation occurred in the form of providing inaccurate generalized information “successful bombing” (let me remind, the most targets were dummies and the enemy suffered minors damage).

The possibility of inaccurate information arising here was the desire to create a favorable impression, i.e. the goal was different from the goal of the recipient of information (publicity) to know the truth.

Requesting detailing information by asking questions: - “What is the damage inflicted on the enemy?” and “What proportion of the hit targets were mock-ups?” allow us to detect low-quality generalized information (of course provided the answers to these questions are quality information). At the same time, it needs to note that providing low-quality information in the answer the detailed questions is more difficult mutter for the information provider since his answers are easier to check (metainforming method) and in general it can be said that concrete lie is, so to speak, a sharper object which is in the bag.

The Method of Linking.

The essence of this method is to find informations that is logically linked with provided information in such a way that the truth of linked information (maybe with certain degree of probability) will mean the information received is quality or low-quality information.

For example, during my vacation a note was prepared for the management about stuff reduction in the department I headed (there was reduction everywhere). When I asked what was in this note? The information was: “Nothing special – proposals that we discussed before your vacation”. However, there was linked information – the proposal was prepared by employee of another department. This indicated that I was told lie (provided low-quality information). This is what later turned out to be a case – there were proposals to restructure my department that had no been discussed with me before.

Sometimes linked information appearance before the main one. For example, a call on Viber from unknown person with foreign country code indicated that the caller is a scammer and that further information will be provided that is fully low-quality information (the author has checked it on himself).

Linked informations can be generated by the recipient of information in the form of logical conclusions.

Many organizations in order to confirm the high quality of the product provide the linked informations along with information about the characteristic of the product. Such information includes:

• provision a guarantee;

• availability of quality certificate;

• trademark (brand).

The Method of Revealing.

The method is based on asking questions which reveal missing information. The posing of such questions depends on the fullness of information and knowledge that the subject has, as well as on intuition.

However, posing revealing questions does not guarantee that the provider of information will give a truthful answer. At the same time, in this case he will have to, in answering the question, provide disinformation in the form of inaccurate information or fictious information, i.e. in common language, simply lie or make up, and this is easier to detect than incomplete information.

Let me remind you that in the example with skiing which I gave to illustrate the incomplete information, the revealing question could have been: - “Were there any incidents without the injuries?” and, most likely, I would have told the wife about that two incidents.

Since incomplete information is most insidious and difficult to detect type of low-quality information we will dwell on it in more detail.

The reason is needed to pose the revealing question(s). For this, as noted above it needs to find either a contradiction among the informations or to form a suspicion that the information may be incomplete.

To find inconsistences it needs to obtain as much detailed informations as possible and preferably from different sources. To form suspicious, it needs to assess the possibilities of the source providing incomplete information paying particular attention to three of above-mentioned possibilities for the occurrence of ow-quality information: - purpose, mediation, and facts from the past.

As could be noticed even when giving examples illustrating the above-mentioned methods, these methods were sometimes used in combination. Thus, in example with checking of generalized information “successful bombing” the method of detailing was used to obtain detailed informations (answers) and the method of metainforming was used for possible checking these of this detailed informations. In the example illustrating the method of linking was the method of detailing also used.

Let’s summarize our research on the question: “How to get quality information?”. Since, as you understand, there is no one hundred guarantee that after all actions you will be dealing with quality information we will formulate the question more precisely: - “How to maximize the likelihood that you are dealing with quality information?”.

To do this it needs to detect low-quality information using 4 methods described above. But in order to start using of these methods it needs either see or suspect that among informations received there are low-quality informations by using the signs of low-quality information existence and knowing possibilities and reasons for the occurrence of low-quality information.

Below I will give the answer of Artificial Intellect on the question: "How to check if the Information is true?".

Question: How to check if the Information is true?

Answer: AI Copilot March 2025

 

Great question! To check if information is true, you can follow these steps:

 1. Verify the source: Check if the source is credible, authoritative, and well-regarded on the topic. Reliable sources usually have a track record of accuracy.

 2. Cross-check facts: Look for the same information from multiple reputable sources. If they align, it's likely accurate.

 3. Check publication date: Ensure the information is current and relevant. Outdated facts can sometimes lead to misconceptions.

 4. Assess bias: Consider whether the source might have a particular agenda or bias. Neutral sources are often more trustworthy.

 5. Use expert opinions: Find what specialists or professionals in the relevant field say about the topic.

 6. Seek peer-reviewed content: For scientific or academic claims, peer-reviewed studies are usually reliable.

​

 Would you like to try verifying something specific together?

Comparing the approaches of AI and QIT I will say that the approach based on Qualitative Information Theory gives more complete and clearer picture in answering the questions how and when to verify information for veracity (how to minimize to use of low-quality information).

Actually AI gives information about only one method - Method of Metainforming and even this information is not complete.