Loukas Konstantinou
Evangelos Karapanos
ABSTRACT
The use of technology to combat online misinformation is becoming a prominent topic of research and practice, yet most of the existing solutions do not consider the impact of cognitive biases in misinformation-related decision-making. Addressing this gap, the present paper explores the potential of nudging to inform the design of technological interventions that combat misinformation. We report on a design workshop with 29 participants, who were asked to conceive technology-mediated nudges for misinformation with the use of the "Nudge Deck", a design-support tool that presents 23 interaction design mechanisms for nudging.
- J Anderson. 2017. Even social media-savvy teens can’t spot a fake news story.Google Scholar
- Michael Barthel, Amy Mitchell, and Jesse Holcomb. 2016. Many Americans believe fake news is sowing confusion. (2016).Google Scholar
- Nadia M Brashier, Gordon Pennycook, Adam J Berinsky, and David G Rand. 2021. Timing matters when correcting fake news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118, 5 (2021), e2020043118.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ana Caraban, Evangelos Karapanos, Daniel Gonçalves, and Pedro Campos. 2019. 23 Ways to Nudge: A Review of Technology-Mediated Nudging in Human-Computer Interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 503.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ana Caraban, Loukas Konstantinou, and Evangelos Karapanos. 2020. The Nudge Deck: A design support tool for technology-mediated nudging. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference. 395–406.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ee Pin Chang, Ullrich Ecker, and Andrew Page. 2018. Continued Influence Effect of Misinformation in Rumination. (2018).Google Scholar
- Serge Egelman, Lorrie Faith Cranor, and Jason Hong. 2008. You’ve been warned: an empirical study of the effectiveness of web browser phishing warnings. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1065–1074.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas Erickson and Wendy A Kellogg. 2000. Social translucence: an approach to designing systems that support social processes. ACM transactions on computer-human interaction (TOCHI) 7, 1 (2000), 59–83.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jonathan St BT Evans. 2003. In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences 7, 10 (2003), 454–459.Google Scholar
- Miriam Fernandez and Harith Alani. 2018. Online misinformation: Challenges and future directions. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018. 595–602.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Álvaro Figueira and Luciana Oliveira. 2017. The current state of fake news: challenges and opportunities. Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017), 817–825.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel J Flynn, Brendan Nyhan, and Jason Reifler. 2017. The nature and origins of misperceptions: Understanding false and unsupported beliefs about politics. Political Psychology 38 (2017), 127–150.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brian J Fogg. 2009. A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology. 1–7.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bertram Gawronski and Laura A Creighton. 2013. Dual process theories. (2013).Google Scholar
- Agata Giełczyk, Rafał Wawrzyniak, and Michał Choraś. 2019. Evaluation of the existing tools for fake news detection. In IFIP International Conference on Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management. Springer, 144–151.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Pelle Guldborg Hansen and Andreas Maaløe Jespersen. 2013. Nudge and the manipulation of choice: A framework for the responsible use of the nudge approach to behaviour change in public policy. European Journal of Risk Regulation 4, 1 (2013), 3–28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel Kahneman. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.Google Scholar
- Kalev Leetaru. 2017. The backfire effect and why Facebook’s’ Fake News’ warning gets it all wrong.Google Scholar
- Falk Lieder, Thomas L Griffiths, Quentin J M Huys, and Noah D Goodman. 2018. The anchoring bias reflects rational use of cognitive resources. Psychonomic bulletin & review 25, 1 (2018), 322–349.Google Scholar
- Panagiotis Metaxas and Samantha Finn. 2019. Investigating the infamous# Pizzagate conspiracy theory. Technology Science (2019).Google Scholar
- Judith Möller, Robbert Nicolai van de Velde, Lisa Merten, and Cornelius Puschmann. 2020. Explaining online news engagement based on browsing behavior: Creatures of habit?Social Science Computer Review 38, 5 (2020), 616–632.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Raymond S Nickerson. 1998. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of general psychology 2, 2 (1998), 175–220.Google Scholar
- Gordon Pennycook, Tyrone D Cannon, and David G Rand. 2018. Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news.Journal of experimental psychology: general 147, 12 (2018), 1865.Google Scholar
- Layton F Rikkers. 2002. The bandwagon effect.Google Scholar
- Sebastian W Schuetz, Tracy Ann Sykes, and Viswanath Venkatesh. 2021. Combating COVID-19 fake news on social media through fact checking: antecedents and consequences. European Journal of Information Systems 30, 4 (2021), 376–388.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Anuj K Shah and Daniel M Oppenheimer. 2008. Heuristics made easy: an effort-reduction framework.Psychological bulletin 134, 2 (2008), 207.Google Scholar
- Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin.Google Scholar
- Ziga Turk. 2018. Technology as enabler of fake news and a potential tool to combat it. (2018).Google Scholar
- Sander Van der Linden, Anthony Leiserowitz, Seth Rosenthal, and Edward Maibach. 2017. Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change. Global Challenges 1, 2 (2017), 1600008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vinod Venkatraman, Rich Timpone, Manuel Garcia-Garcia, Ornella Godard, Davide Baldo, Martin Schoeller, Colin Strong, and Tamara Ansons. 2020. Disrupting system 1 thinking: Better science for smarter marketing. ESOMAR Festival 140 (2020).Google Scholar
- Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral. 2018. The spread of true and false news online. Science 359, 6380 (2018), 1146–1151.Google Scholar
- Maja Vukovic. 2009. Crowdsourcing for enterprises. In 2009 congress on services-I. IEEE, 686–692.Google Scholar
- Liang Wu, Fred Morstatter, Kathleen M Carley, and Huan Liu. 2019. Misinformation in social media: definition, manipulation, and detection. ACM SIGKDD Explorations Newsletter 21, 2 (2019), 80–90.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Min Wu, Robert C Miller, and Simson L Garfinkel. 2006. Do security toolbars actually prevent phishing attacks?. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems. 601–610.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Steven Zimmerman, Alistair Thorpe, Chris Fox, and Udo Kruschwitz. 2019. Privacy nudging in search: Investigating potential impacts. In Proceedings of the 2019 Conference on Human Information Interaction and Retrieval. 283–287.Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Nudging for Online Misinformation: a Design Inquiry
Recommendations
Combating Misinformation Through Nudging
Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2019AbstractRecent studies have shown that the spread and consumption of misinformation online can be attributed to errors in human decision making, facilitated by cognitive biases. The field of Behavioral Economics has contributed a repertoire of such ...
Self-determined nudging: a system concept for human–machine interaction
AbstractHumans sometimes struggle when making decisions, because what they want to do in a specific moment can differ from what they feel they should do in general. This phenomenon can also be found in situations of human–machine interaction. In order to ...
Co-Designing with Preschoolers Using Fictional Inquiry and Comicboarding
CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsIn this case study, we describe a design workshop with 7 children age 4-6 using existing co-design techniques known to elicit design insights in older individuals. We found that our 5- and 6-year-old participants successfully generated design ideas ...
Comments