How to resolve content moderation dilemmas between free speech and harmful misinformation? Thrilled to share our new article just out in PNAS
With @JasonReifler @stefanmherzog @lorenz_spreen @STWorg @MLeiser and Ralph Hertwig @arc_mpib @mpib_berlin 1/11
pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pn… Content moderation of online speech is a moral minefield, especially when 2 key values come into conflict: upholding freedom of expression and preventing harm caused by misinformation. In our study, we examined how the U.S. public would approach such difficult trade-offs. 2/11

Happy to introduce our new Toolbox of Interventions Against Online Misinformation and Manipulation. It is an expert-curated research resource of 10 types of evidence-supported interventions. 🧰
Interactive website …terventionstoolbox.mpib-berlin.mpg.de
Preprint psyarxiv.com/x8ejt
🧵1/8 The toolbox delivers a conceptual overview of the breadth of interventions, incl. their target, scalability, & limitations. We categorize these interventions as nudges, which target behaviors; boosts, which target competences; or refutation strategies, which target beliefs. 2/8

Happy to share our new preprint with @stefanmherzog @philipplenz6 @STWorg and Ralph Hertwig "Public attitudes towards algorithmic personalization and use of personal data online: Evidence from Germany, Great Britain, and the US" psyarxiv.com/3q4mg 1/N Billions of people rely on data-driven algorithms online--often without noticing--when scrolling through news feeds, following video suggestions or using search engines. But how acceptable do they find the use of their personal information for the purpose of personalization? 2/N