Reply to Tannenbaum et al.: Constructive dialogue advancing research on civic honesty

Persuasion Index: A Theory-Guided Framework for Persuasion Analysis

Identifying persuasive rhetorical cues is critical across domains, from detecting information manipulation and improving AI safety to advancing public health communication. We propose Persuasion...

Dialogues on Democracy: Belief-Tailored AI Conversations Reduce Inaccurate Election Denial Beliefs

Elections, while central to democratic functioning, have become increasingly threatened by beliefs about election fraud. Artificial intelligence (AI) provides a novel opportunity to address such false beliefs through dynamic conversation and debunking. Through two experiments (N = 1,802 Republicans from Lucid who endorsed election fraud claims), we examined the use of AI to fact-check 2020 election conspiracies prior to the 2024 US Presidential election. We tested the effects of two treatments (an information-tailored and values-tailored AI dialogue) in which AI fact-checked their claims and tailored arguments to the specific election conspiracy that the participant themselves articulated. Both treatment conditions, when compared to a control dialogue and a simple statement that the conspiracy was incorrect, reduced confidence in their election conspiracy claims. There was no significant difference between information-tailored and values-tailored feedback. Promisingly, participants with the strongest baseline denialism experienced the largest decreases in denialism beliefs. These studies highlight the potential of AI-driven interventions to address election misinformation.

Guest Post — Restoring Trust in Science: What Would Make a Difference? - The Scholarly Kitchen

Today's guest post asserts that trust won’t be restored by "better messaging" alone, but via better incentives, more disciplined public communication, and really listening to the people who have walked away from us.

Civic Action

Commonly, researchers have looked for civic life in a distinct sector in which they assume that voluntary associations will cultivate special skills and virtues. Gathering together many challenges to this approach, and using ethnographic cases of housing advocacy and youth civic engagement projects, the authors reconceptualize “the civic” as civic action and show how patterned scene styles shape it. Doing so reveals patterns of action in complex organizations that may span institutional sectors. The authors show how researchers can locate scene styles, and with an extensive literature review, they portray several common styles and suggest that different civic styles often lead to different outcomes.

Persuasion: Empirical Evidence

We provide a selective survey of empirical evidence on the effects as well as the drivers of persuasive communication. We consider persuasion directed at consumers, voters, donors, and investors. We organize our review around four questions. First, to what extent does persuasion affect the behavior of each of these groups? Second, what models best capture the response to persuasive communication? Third, what are persuaders' incentives, and what limits their ability to distort communications? Finally, what evidence exists on the way persuasion affects equilibrium outcomes in economics and politics?

Misplaced Divides? Discussing Political Disagreement With Strangers Can Be Unexpectedly Positive

Differences of opinion between people are common in everyday life, but discussing those differences openly in conversation may be unnecessarily rare. We report three experiments ( N = 1,264 U.S.-based adults) demonstrating that people’s interest in discussing important but potentially divisive topics is guided by their expectations about how positively the conversation will unfold, leaving them more interested in having a conversation with someone who agrees versus disagrees with them. People’s expectations about their conversations, however, were systematically miscalibrated such that people underestimated how positive these conversations would be—especially in cases of disagreement. Miscalibrated expectations stemmed from underestimating the degree of common ground that would emerge in conversation and from failing to appreciate the power of social forces in conversation that create social connection. Misunderstanding the outcomes of conversation could lead people to avoid discussing disagreements more often, creating a misplaced barrier to learning, social connection, free inquiry, and free expression.

Trust in the Federal Government Makes People Less Likely to Help One Another, Study Finds

But trust in local interventions boosts civic engagement.

The Conversation: In-depth analysis, research, news and ideas from leading academics and researchers.

Curated by professional editors, The Conversation offers informed commentary and debate on the issues affecting our world. Plus a Plain English guide to the latest developments and discoveries from the university and research sector.

Civic, Citizen and Grassroots Science: Towards a Transformative Scientific Research Model | Request PDF

Request PDF | On Jan 1, 2013, Jessica McCallum Breen and others published Civic, Citizen and Grassroots Science: Towards a Transformative Scientific Research Model | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

Beginner's Guide to Arguing Constructively

How to turn arguments from vicious battles into productive dialogues.

How not to build trust - Mathew's newsletter

Last Friday I welcomed two "steps in the right direction" from W Social. But timing is everything.

How not to build trust - Mathew's newsletter

Last Friday I welcomed two "steps in the right direction" from W Social. But timing is everything.

Best practices: conversation design

An introduction to IBM Research’s Natural Conversation Framework