| Literature DB >> 36247733 |
Sheshadri Chatterjee1, Ranjan Chaudhuri2, Demetris Vrontis3.
Abstract
Studies show that COVID-19 has increased the effects of misinformation and fake news that proliferated during the continued crisis and related turbulent environment. Fake news and misinformation can come from various sources such as social media, print media, as well as from electronic media such as instant messaging services and other apps. There is a growing interest among researchers and practitioners on how fake news and misinformation impacts on supply chain disruption. But the limited research in this area leaves a gap. With this background, the purpose of this study is to determine the role of fake news and misinformation in supply chain disruption and the consequences to a firm's operational performance. This study also investigates the moderating role of technology competency in supply chain disruption and operational performance of the firm. With the help of theories and literature, a theoretical model has been developed. Later, the conceptual model has been validated using partial least squares structural equation modeling. The study finds that there is a significant impact of misinformation and fake news on supply chain disruption, which in turn negatively impacts firms' operational performance. The study also highlights that firms' technology competency can improve the supply chain situation that has been disrupted by misinformation and fake news.Entities:
Keywords: Fake news; Misinformation; Operational performance; Supply chain resilience; Supply chain uncertainty; Technology competency
Year: 2022 PMID: 36247733 PMCID: PMC9540173 DOI: 10.1007/s10479-022-05001-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ann Oper Res ISSN: 0254-5330 Impact factor: 4.820
Fig. 1The conceptual model
Demographic profile (N = 308)
| Particulars | Category | Number | Percentage (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 158 | 52 |
| Female | 150 | 48 | |
| Age | 18–35 years | 208 | 67 |
| 36–55 years | 100 | 33 | |
| Education | High school | 37 | 12 |
| Graduate | 216 | 70 | |
| Postgraduate | 55 | 18 | |
| Location | Asia | 209 | 68 |
| Europe | 99 | 32 | |
| Hierarchy | Employees | 126 | 41 |
| Managers | 105 | 34 | |
| Leaders | 77 | 25 |
Measurement properties
| Constructs/items | LF | AVE | CR | Α | t-values |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIS | 0.81 | 0.86 | 0.89 | ||
| MIS1 | 0.89 | 24.12 | |||
| MIS2 | 0.92 | 27.34 | |||
| MIS3 | 0.88 | 38.09 | |||
| MIS4 | 0.86 | 34.16 | |||
| MIS5 | 0.82 | 30.18 | |||
| MIS6 | 0.90 | 19.17 | |||
| MIS7 | 0.95 | 26.64 | |||
| FAN | 0.81 | 0.85 | 0.90 | ||
| FAN1 | 0.96 | 24.16 | |||
| FAN2 | 0.95 | 32.26 | |||
| FAN3 | 0.86 | 27.29 | |||
| FAN4 | 0.82 | 31.81 | |||
| FAN5 | 0.92 | 26.07 | |||
| FAN6 | 0.89 | 25.39 | |||
| SCR | 0.84 | 0.87 | 0.92 | ||
| SCR1 | 0.92 | 33.71 | |||
| SCR2 | 0.91 | 26.36 | |||
| SCR3 | 0.87 | 34.19 | |||
| SCR4 | 0.86 | 36.16 | |||
| SCR5 | 0.91 | 39.11 | |||
| SCR6 | 0.97 | 26.34 | |||
| SCU | 0.85 | 0.88 | 0.94 | ||
| SCU1 | 0.95 | 26.22 | |||
| SCU2 | 0.85 | 28.36 | |||
| SCU3 | 0.90 | 34.27 | |||
| SCU4 | 0.96 | 26.28 | |||
| SCU5 | 0.88 | 31.72 | |||
| SCU6 | 0.97 | 30.11 | |||
| SCU7 | 0.92 | 34.16 | |||
| OPP | 0.86 | 0.91 | 0.95 | ||
| OPP1 | 0.95 | 26.01 | |||
| OPP2 | 0.90 | 27.97 | |||
| OPP3 | 0.96 | 26.11 | |||
| OPP4 | 0.85 | 36.17 | |||
| OPP5 | 0.97 | 31.12 |
Discriminant validity (Fornell & Larcker criteria)
| Constructs | MIS | FAN | SCR | SCU | OPP | AVE |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIS | 0.90 | 0.81 | ||||
| FAN | 0.16 | 0.90 | 0.81 | |||
| SCR | 0.22 | 0.29 | 0.91 | 0.84 | ||
| SCU | 0.31 | 0.26 | 0.34 | 0.92 | 0.85 | |
| OPP | 0.29 | 0.17 | 0.29 | 0.33 | 0.93 | 0.86 |
Discriminant validity test (HTMT)
| Constructs | MIS | FAN | SCR | SCU | OPP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIS | |||||
| FAN | 0.46 | ||||
| SCR | 0.26 | 0.29 | |||
| SCU | 0.19 | 0.34 | 0.22 | ||
| OPP | 0.35 | 0.17 | 0.26 | 0.41 |
Effect size f2
| Construct | SCR | SCU | OPP |
|---|---|---|---|
| MIS | 0.290 (M) | 0.111 (W) | |
| FAN | 0.387 (L) | 0.417 (L) | |
| SCR | 0.399 (L) | ||
| SCU | 0.401 (L) |
L large, M medium, W weak
Moderator analysis (MGA)
| Linkages | Hypotheses | p value differences | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|
| (SCR → OPP) × TC | H5a | 0.04 | Significant |
| (SCU → OPP) × TC | H5b | 0.01 | Significant |
Path coefficients, p values, R2 values with remarks
| Linkages | Hypotheses | R2 values/path coefficients | p values | Remarks |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Effects on SCR | R2 = 0.38 | |||
| By MIS | H1a | − 0.32 | p < 0.01(**) | Supported |
| By FAN | H2a | − 0.37 | p < 0.001(***) | Supported |
| Effects on SCU | R2 = 0.45 | |||
| By MIS | H1b | 0.41 | p < 0.001(***) | Supported |
| By FAN | H2b | 0.44 | p < 0.001(***) | Supported |
| Effects on OPP | R2 = 0.68 | |||
| By SCR | H3 | 0.39 | p < 0.01(**) | Supported |
| By SCU | H4 | − 0.47 | p < 0.001(***) | Supported |
| (SCR → OPP) × TC | H5a | 0.19 | p < 0.05(*) | Supported |
| (SCU → OPP) × TC | H5b | 0.26 | p < 0.01(**) | Supported |
Fig. 2Validated model (SEM)
Fig. 3Effects of TC on H3
Fig. 4Effects of TC on H4