ReviewPsychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society2020
Citizens Versus the Internet: Confronting Digital Challenges With Cognitive Tools.
Review in Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
77 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 397 citations in OpenAlex.
- Psychological Inoculation for Credibility Assessment, Sharing Intention, and Discernment of Misinformation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Accuracy prompts are a replicable and generalizable approach for reducing the spread of misinformation.Nature communications · 2022Pooled it
- A prosocial fake news intervention with durable effects.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- The Challenge of Debunking Health Misinformation in Dynamic Social Media Conversations: Online Randomized Study of Public Masking During COVID-19.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Trial
- Own and others' confidence in social information use.iScience · 2026Article
- AI-supported real-time news evaluation reveals effects of time constraint on misinformation discernment.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- From emergence to amplification: an analysis of lifecycle models to address health mis-disinformation in the digital environment.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- Digital Technology in Cognitive Decline: Bibliometric and Visualization Study.Current Alzheimer research · 2026Review
- The case against efficiency: friction in social media.Npj complexity · 2026Review
- Gaming disorder in the ICD-11: the state of the game.BMC psychiatry · 2025Review
- Misinformation interventions and online sharing behaviour: lessons learned from two pre-registered field studies.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- The link between tobacco smoking and susceptibility to misinformation.Psychopharmacology · 2025Article
- An ensemble method utilising multiple thinking styles that boosts the wisdom-of inner- crowd effect.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Contested science communication: Representations of scientists and their science in newspaper articles and the associated comment sections.Public understanding of science (Bristol, England) · 2025Article
- Politricks: Teaching political tricks and discernment through active and passive tools.PNAS nexus · 2025Article
- Generative artificial intelligence-mediated confirmation bias in health information seeking.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025Review
- The illusory-truth effect and its absence under accuracy-focused processing are robust across contexts of low and high advertising exposure.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Influence of Visual Coding Based on Attraction Effect on Human-Computer Interface.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- A path forward on online misinformation mitigation based on current user behavior.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Article
17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Internet has evolved into a ubiquitous and indispensable digital environment in which people communicate, seek information, and make decisions. Despite offering various benefits, online environments are also replete with smart, highly adaptive choice architectures designed primarily to maximize commercial interests, capture and sustain users' attention, monetize user data, and predict and influence future behavior. This online landscape holds multiple negative consequences for society, such as a decline in human autonomy, rising incivility in online conversation, the facilitation of political extremism, and the spread of disinformation. Benevolent choice architects working with regulators may curb the worst excesses of manipulative choice architectures, yet the strategic advantages, resources, and data remain with commercial players. One way to address some of this imbalance is with interventions that empower Internet users to gain some control over their digital environments, in part by boosting their information literacy and their cognitive resistance to manipulation. Our goal is to present a conceptual map of interventions that are based on insights from psychological science. We begin by systematically outlining how online and offline environments differ despite being increasingly inextricable. We then identify four major types of challenges that users encounter in online environments: persuasive and manipulative choice architectures, AI-assisted information architectures, false and misleading information, and distracting environments. Next, we turn to how psychological science can inform interventions to counteract these challenges of the digital world. After distinguishing among three types of behavioral and cognitive interventions-nudges, technocognition, and boosts-we focus on boosts, of which we identify two main groups: (a) those aimed at enhancing people's agency in their digital environments (e.g., self-nudging, deliberate ignorance) and (b) those aimed at boosting competencies of reasoning and resilience to manipulation (e.g., simple decision aids, inoculation). These cognitive tools are designed to foster the civility of online discourse and protect reason and human autonomy against manipulative choice architectures, attention-grabbing techniques, and the spread of false information.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.