Toolbox of Interventions Against Online Misinformation

Kozyreva, Anastasia; Lorenz-Spreen, Philipp; Herzog, Stefan M.; Ecker, Ullrich K. H.; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Hertwig, Ralph

doi:10.31234/osf.io/x8ejt

Cited by 45 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 37 publications

(54 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Like in their paper, we stress that interventions aimed at mitigating misinformation should target this phenomenon and seek to improve veracity judgements by encouraging deliberation. It will also be important to follow up on these findings by examining whether time pressure has a similar effect in the context of news items that have been subject to interventions such as debunking 13,48 . Credibly different effects between the control and time pressure treatments are marked with an asterisk ("*").…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time pressure reduces misinformation discrimination ability but does not alter response bias

Sultan

Tump

Geers

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many parts of our social lives are speeding up, a process known as social acceleration. How social acceleration impacts people’s ability to judge the veracity of online news, and ultimately the spread of misinformation, is largely unknown. We examined the effects of accelerated online dynamics, operationalised as time pressure, on online misinformation evaluation. Participants judged the veracity of true and false news headlines with or without time pressure. We used signal detection theory to disentangle the effects of time pressure on discrimination ability and response bias, as well as on four key determinants of misinformation susceptibility: analytical thinking, ideological congruency, motivated reflection, and familiarity. Time pressure reduced participants’ ability to accurately distinguish true from false news (discrimination ability) but did not alter their tendency to classify an item as true or false (response bias). Key drivers of misinformation susceptibility, such as ideological congruency and familiarity, remained influential under time pressure. Our results highlight the dangers of social acceleration online: People are less able to accurately judge the veracity of news online, while prominent drivers of misinformation susceptibility remain present. Interventions aimed at increasing deliberation may thus be fruitful avenues to combat online misinformation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Time pressure reduces misinformation discrimination ability but does not alter response bias

Sultan

Tump

Geers

et al. 2022

Sci Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whole fields would disagree with this pessimistic view. Insights into clinical pathology (e.g., dark personality and empathy, Pajevic et al, 2018; and narcissism in leadership, Grijalva et al, 2015), criminal justice (e.g., memory complications in eyewitnesses, Wells et al, 1998; Wixted et al, 2018), digital interventions (e.g., promoting prosocial behavior, Grüning et al, 2023; and reducing misinformation, Kozyreva et al, 2022), and political attitudes (e.g., the role of emotions, Grüning & Schubert, 2022; Seibt et al, 2019) allow relevant conclusions for cognition and behavior through empirical observations. These selected examples show that we, indeed, can identify variables or causes, even though not ad infinitum (i.e., for the cause before the cause before this cause, and so on).…”

Section: A Simplified Prediction Model Of Human Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Free will determines the limits of psychological foresight: Review of “Free Will” by Sam Harris

Grüning

2023

Futures & Foresight Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The existence of free will and its prerequisites have entertained countless debates. The position one takes in these debates dictates their outlook on limitations of predicting human psychology. Sam Harris (2012), in his book, misses out on exploring these consequences accepting or rejecting free will has for the predictability of human decision‐making and action‐taking. Likewise, referencers of his work addressed this topic only peripherally and, to the best of my knowledge, have never explored its consequences in depth. Therefore, in the present review, I aim to demonstrate and formalize the following: If we understand human cognition and behavior as the result of environmental and individual causes that both are knowable, adding a per definition indeterminable source, namely, free will, can only reduce the maximum possible power of any used prediction model. Accepting a free human will renders error‐free foresight theoretically, and empirically, impossible. This has consequences for all forecasting and planning methods that concern human agents as well as their tools’ utility (e.g., scenarios and psychological analysis). I address the consequences free will belief has conceptually for three application fields: management and leadership, historic analysis, and theory building.

show abstract

“…About 56% of the respondents worry that they miss out on important information, while 53% think they may miss out on challenging viewpoints. In a German survey about personalization in general, 82% of 1,065 respondents claim that they were concerned about their data privacy, and 57% objected to personalized news feeds on social media (Kozyreva et al 2020). Despite these concerns, users seem to think that the benefits of news personalization outweigh its risks, and even users that are conscious about user privacy do little to protect their data and easily adopt personalized services (Thurman 2019).…”

Section: User Privacy Issues and Implications For News Recommendationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recommending news in traditional media companies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of recommender systems in online news personalization has made it possible to tailor the news stream to the individual interests of each reader. Previous research on commercial recommender systems has emphasized their use in large-scale media houses and technology companies, and real-world experiments indicate substantial improvements of click rates and user satisfaction. It is less understood how smaller media houses are coping with this new technology, how the technology affects their business models, their editorial processes, and their news production in general. Here we report on the experiences from numerous Scandinavian media houses that have experimented with various recommender strategies and streamlined their news production to provide personalized news experiences. In addition to influencing the content and style of news stories and the working environment of journalists, the news recommender systems have been part of a profound digital transformation of the whole media industry. Interestingly, many media houses have found it undesirable to automate the entire recommendation process and look for approaches that combine automatic recommendations with editorial choices.

show abstract

Toolbox of Interventions Against Online Misinformation

Cited by 45 publications

References 37 publications

Time pressure reduces misinformation discrimination ability but does not alter response bias

Time pressure reduces misinformation discrimination ability but does not alter response bias

Free will determines the limits of psychological foresight: Review of “Free Will” by Sam Harris

Recommending news in traditional media companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About