# The Mechanism of Tendentious Information Dissemination in Cyberspace
## 4 Results
### Results of the Measurement Model
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Latent** & **Observed** & **Unstd.** & **S.E.** & **\(t\)-Value** & **\(p\)** & **Std.** & **SMC** & **CR** & **AVE** \\ \hline  & ISO1 & 1.000 & & & & 0.725 & 0.526 & 0.874 & 0.585 \\  & ISO2 & 0.915 & 0.090 & 10.132 & *** & 0.704 & 0.496 & & \\ ISO & ISO3 & 1.147 & 0.091 & 12.636 & *** & 0.897 & 0.805 & & \\  & ISO5 & 0.970 & 0.083 & 11.710 & *** & 0.814 & 0.663 & & \\  & ISO8 & 0.913 & 0.096 & 9.474 & *** & 0.659 & 0.434 & & \\  & DTR3 & 1.000 & & & & 0.794 & 0.630 & 0.735 & 0.484 \\ DTR & DTR5 & 0.736 & 0.112 & 6.576 & *** & 0.588 & 0.346 & & \\  & DTR8 & 0.872 & 0.128 & 6.791 & *** & 0.689 & 0.475 & & \\  & ATD2 & 1.000 & & & 0.861 & 0.741 & 0.927 & 0.761 \\ ATD & ATD3 & 1.088 & 0.055 & 19.912 & *** & 0.942 & 0.887 & & \\ ATD4 & ATD4 & 0.966 & 0.058 & 16.643 & *** & 0.848 & 0.719 & & \\  & ATD5 & 0.922 & 0.057 & 16.212 & *** & 0.835 & 0.697 & & \\  & SND3 & 1.000 & & & & 0.666 & 0.444 & 0.823 & 0.541 \\ SND & SND4 & 1.026 & 0.104 & 9.849 & *** & 0.847 & 0.717 & & \\  & SND6 & 0.646 & 0.067 & 9.579 & *** & 0.784 & 0.615 & & \\  & SND7 & 0.829 & 0.103 & 8.027 & *** & 0.624 & 0.389 & & \\  & PBC2 & 1.000 & & & 0.613 & 0.376 & 0.832 & 0.564 \\ PBC & PBC3 & 1.302 & 0.133 & 9.811 & *** & 0.885 & 0.783 & & \\ PBC4 & 1.246 & 0.127 & 9.815 & *** & 0.888 & 0.789 & & \\  & PBC6 & 0.823 & 0.115 & 7.139 & *** & 0.556 & 0.309 & & \\  & IDI1 & 1.000 & & & & 0.686 & 0.471 & 0.894 & 0.586 \\  & IDI2 & 1.265 & 0.117 & 10.782 & *** & 0.796 & 0.634 & & \\ IDI3 & 1.118 & 0.107 & 10.466 & *** & 0.770 & 0.593 & & \\ IDI5 & 0.885 & 0.097 & 9.088 & *** & 0.659 & 0.434 & & \\  & IDI6 & 1.209 & 0.111 & 10.872 & *** & 0.804 & 0.646 & & \\  & IDI7 & 1.316 & 0.115 & 11.478 & *** & 0.859 & 0.738 & & \\  & IDB3 & 1.000 & & & 0.839 & 0.704 & 0.883 & 0.655 \\ IDB4 & 1.072 & 0.069 & 15.574 & *** & 0.891 & 0.794 & & \\  & IDB6 & 0.974 & 0.072 & 13.622 & *** & 0.793 & 0.629 & & \\  & IDB8 & 0.848 & 0.074 & 11.528 & *** & 0.702 & 0.493 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: ISO: Information Sentiment Orientation; DTR: Dissemination Trust Relationship; ATD: Attitude Toward Dissemination; SND: Subject Norm of Dissemination; PBC: Perceived Behavior Control; IDI: Information Dissemination Intention; IDB: Information Dissemination Behavior; Unstd.: unstandardized factor loadings; S.E.: measurement error; \(t\)-value: \(t\)-test result of the loading of each factor; \(p\): significance of the load of each factor; Std.; standardized factor loadings; SMC: multivariate correlation square coefficient; CR: composite reliability; AVE: average variance extraction. *** \(p<0.001\).  
\end{table} 
Table 1: Reliability and convergent validity of the tendentious information dissemination measurement scale. Table 2 presents the results for discriminant validity analysis of the tendentious information dissemination measurement scale. In Table 2, the bold values are the arithmetic square root of the _AVE_ value of each latent variable in the index system, while the lower triangular matrix is the Pearson's correlation coefficient between each latent variable. These results show that the absolute values of the Pearson correlation coefficients among all latent variables in this study are significantly lower than the arithmetic square root of the _AVE_ of the corresponding latent variables, indicating that there is good discriminant validity among the different latent variables and the research variables are clearly and accurately defined. In summary, a comprehensive test of the reliability and validity of the measurement scale confirmed that the observed variables are reasonably present and each item has good reliability, all latent variables have good internal consistency reliability and convergence validity, and different latent variables have obvious discriminative validity. Therefore, this study's measurement scale had a high degree of reliability. In addition to ensuring the scientificity and effectiveness of subsequent model construction, these results support the reliability of this study's conclusions.