research-article

Open access

Nudging for Online Misinformation: a Design Inquiry

Authors:

Loukas Konstantinou,

Evangelos KarapanosAuthors Info & Claims

CSCW '23 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

Pages 69 - 75

https://doi.org/10.1145/3584931.3607015

Published: 14 October 2023 Publication History

All formats PDF

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.

References

[1]

J Anderson. 2017. Even social media-savvy teens can’t spot a fake news story.

[2]

Michael Barthel, Amy Mitchell, and Jesse Holcomb. 2016. Many Americans believe fake news is sowing confusion. (2016).

[3]

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.

[4]

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.

Digital Library

[5]

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.

Digital Library

[6]

Ee Pin Chang, Ullrich Ecker, and Andrew Page. 2018. Continued Influence Effect of Misinformation in Rumination. (2018).

[7]

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.

Digital Library

[8]

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.

Digital Library

[9]

Jonathan St BT Evans. 2003. In two minds: dual-process accounts of reasoning. Trends in cognitive sciences 7, 10 (2003), 454–459.

[10]

Miriam Fernandez and Harith Alani. 2018. Online misinformation: Challenges and future directions. In Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018. 595–602.

Digital Library

[11]

Álvaro Figueira and Luciana Oliveira. 2017. The current state of fake news: challenges and opportunities. Procedia Computer Science 121 (2017), 817–825.

Digital Library

[12]

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.

[13]

Brian J Fogg. 2009. A behavior model for persuasive design. In Proceedings of the 4th international Conference on Persuasive Technology. 1–7.

Digital Library

[14]

Bertram Gawronski and Laura A Creighton. 2013. Dual process theories. (2013).

[15]

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.

Digital Library

[16]

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.

[17]

Daniel Kahneman. 2011. Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.

[18]

Kalev Leetaru. 2017. The backfire effect and why Facebook’s’ Fake News’ warning gets it all wrong.

[19]

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.

[20]

Panagiotis Metaxas and Samantha Finn. 2019. Investigating the infamous# Pizzagate conspiracy theory. Technology Science (2019).

[21]

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.

Digital Library

[22]

Raymond S Nickerson. 1998. Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of general psychology 2, 2 (1998), 175–220.

[23]

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.

[24]

Layton F Rikkers. 2002. The bandwagon effect.

[25]

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.

[26]

Anuj K Shah and Daniel M Oppenheimer. 2008. Heuristics made easy: an effort-reduction framework.Psychological bulletin 134, 2 (2008), 207.

[27]

Richard H Thaler and Cass R Sunstein. 2009. Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin.

[28]

Ziga Turk. 2018. Technology as enabler of fake news and a potential tool to combat it. (2018).

[29]

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.

[30]

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).

[31]

Soroush Vosoughi, Deb Roy, and Sinan Aral. 2018. The spread of true and false news online. Science 359, 6380 (2018), 1146–1151.

[32]

Maja Vukovic. 2009. Crowdsourcing for enterprises. In 2009 congress on services-I. IEEE, 686–692.

[33]

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.

Digital Library

[34]

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.

Digital Library

[35]

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.

Digital Library

Cited By

Moore RDahlke RForberg PHancock J(2024)The Private Life of QAnon: A Mixed Methods Investigation of Americans' Exposure to QAnon Content on the WebProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870578:CSCW2(1-34)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687057
Efstratiou AEfstratiou MYudhoatmojo SBlackburn JDe Cristofaro E(2024)"Here's Your Evidence": False Consensus in Public Twitter Discussions of COVID-19 ScienceProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870108:CSCW2(1-33)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687010

Index Terms

Nudging for Online Misinformation: a Design Inquiry
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. HCI theory, concepts and models

Recommendations

Combating Misinformation Through Nudging
Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2019
Abstract
Recent 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
Abstract
Humans 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 ...
The Nudging Effect on Tracking Activity
UbiComp/ISWC '22 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 2022 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and the 2022 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers

Wearables activity trackers are becoming widely adopted to understand individual behavior. Understanding behavior may help in self-regulation such as self-monitoring, goal-setting, self-corrective, etc.; Nevertheless, challenges exist in attaining ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

CSCW '23 Companion: Companion Publication of the 2023 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 2023

596 pages

ISBN:9798400701290

DOI:10.1145/3584931

Editors:
Casey Fiesler
University of Colorado Boulder, USA
,
Loren Terveen
University of Minnesota, USA
,
Morgan Ames
University of California, Berkeley, USA
,
Susan Fussell
Cornell University, USA
,
Eric Gilbert
University of Michigan, USA
,
Vera Liao
Microsoft Research Montreal, Canada
,
Xiaojuan Ma
Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong
,
Xinru Page
Brigham Young University, USA
,
Mark Rouncefield
Lancaster University, UK
,
Vivek Singh
Rutgers University, USA
,
Pamela Wisniewski
Vanderbilt University, USA

Copyright © 2023 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

SIGCHI: ACM Special Interest Group on Computer-Human Interaction

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 14 October 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed limited

Conference

CSCW '23

Sponsor:

SIGCHI

CSCW '23: Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 14 - 18, 2023

MN, Minneapolis, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 2,235 of 8,521 submissions, 26%

Upcoming Conference

CSCW '25

Sponsor:
sigchi

Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing

October 18 - 22, 2025

Bergen , Norway

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

2
Total Citations
View Citations
668
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)599
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)76

Reflects downloads up to 13 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Moore RDahlke RForberg PHancock J(2024)The Private Life of QAnon: A Mixed Methods Investigation of Americans' Exposure to QAnon Content on the WebProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870578:CSCW2(1-34)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687057
Efstratiou AEfstratiou MYudhoatmojo SBlackburn JDe Cristofaro E(2024)"Here's Your Evidence": False Consensus in Public Twitter Discussions of COVID-19 ScienceProceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction10.1145/36870108:CSCW2(1-33)Online publication date: 8-Nov-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3687010

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents