Assessing Susceptibility Factors of Confirmation Bias in News Feed Reading
Nattapat Boonprakong, Saumya Pareek, Benjamin Tag, Jorge Gonçalves, Tilman Dingler
Abstract
Individuals tend to apply preferences and beliefs as heuristics to effectively sift through the sheer amount of information available online. Such tendencies, however, often result in cognitive biases, which can skew judgment and open doors for manipulation. In this work, we investigate how individual and contextual factors lead to instances of confirmation bias when seeking, evaluating, and recalling polarising information. We conducted a lab study, in which we exposed participants to opinions on controversial issues through a Twitter-like news feed. We found that low-effortful thinking, strong political beliefs, and content conveying a strong issue amplify the occurrences of confirmation bias, leading to skewed information processing and recall. We discuss how the adverse effects of confirmation bias can be mitigated by taking bias-susceptibility into account. Specifically, social media platforms could aim to reduce strong expressions and integrate media literacy-building mechanisms, as low-effortful thinking styles and strong political beliefs render individuals especially susceptible to cognitive biases.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 45f9c189-ce5f-4fc2-a4b9-472ab6658cf3Cited by top-tier papers2
- How Do HCI Researchers Study Cognitive Biases? A Scoping ReviewNattapat Boonprakong, Benjamin Tag, Jorge Gonçalves, Tilman DinglerCHI 2025 · 19 citations
- ChatLearn: Leveraging Non-Native Speaker Communication Challenges as Language Learning OpportunitiesPeinuan Qin, Yugin Tan, Jingzhu Chen, Nattapat Boonprakong et al.CHI 2026 · 2 citations
Builds on13
- Synthetic Lies: Understanding AI-Generated Misinformation and Evaluating Algorithmic and Human SolutionsJiawei Zhou, Yixuan Zhang, Qianni Luo, Andrea G. Parker et al.CHI 2023 · 283 citations
- How WEIRD is CHI?Sebastian Linxen, Christian Sturm, Florian Brühlmann, Vincent Cassau et al.CHI 2021 · 254 citations
- Measuring Misinformation in Video Search Platforms: An Audit Study on YouTubeEslam Hussein, Prerna Juneja, Tanushree MitraCSCW 2020 · 233 citations
- Fake News on Facebook and Twitter: Investigating How People (Don't) InvestigateChristine Geeng, Savanna Yee, Franziska RoesnerCHI 2020 · 154 citations
- Birds of a feather don't fact-check each other: Partisanship and the evaluation of news in Twitter's Birdwatch crowdsourced fact-checking programJennifer Allen, Cameron Martel, David G. RandCHI 2022 · 104 citations
Related papers
- Adherence to Misinformation on Social Media Through Socio-Cognitive and Group-Based ProcessesAlexandros Efstratiou, Emiliano De CristofaroCSCW 2022 · 23 citations
- Bias-Aware Systems: Exploring Indicators for the Occurrences of Cognitive Biases when Facing Different OpinionsNattapat Boonprakong, Xiuge Chen, Catherine M. Davey, Benjamin Tag et al.CHI 2023 · 27 citations
- Social Media Misinformation and Voting Intentions: Older Adults' Experiences with Manipulative NarrativesFilipo Sharevski, Jennifer Vander Loop, Sanchari DasCSCW 2025 · 4 citations
- Emotion Bubbles: Emotional Composition of Online Discourse Before and After the COVID-19 OutbreakAssem Zhunis, Gabriel Lima, Hyeonho Song, Jiyoung Han et al.WWW 2022 · 18 citations
- Confirmation Bias: The Double-Edged Sword of Data Facts in Visual Data CommunicationShiyao Li, Thomas James Davidson, Cindy Xiong Bearfield, Emily WallCHI 2025 · 16 citations
