Fact-checking has emerged as a principal part of news reporting with over 400 fact-checking organisations worldwide. However, fewer than one in ten individuals report having used a fact-checking service. In this paper, we introduce Google Inject: a technology-mediated nudge that integrates, relevant to one's query, fact-checks, into the Google search results page. We report on a laboratory study that inquired into how four design variables, in particular, the number of fact-checking articles injected, their positioning, concealment and seamlessness affect users' experience and proximal behaviours with Google Inject. All in all, the paper highlights the complexity and importance of nudge design, as seemingly subtle variations in the design and implementation of a nudge can have a profound impact on its effectiveness.

It is increasingly acknowledged that simply presenting users with corrective information is unlikely to produce the desired effects against misinformation. As such, the need for systematic use of behavioral theory is increasingly acknowledged, and behavioral interventions against misinformation are rising. This paper presents a scoping review of digital behavioral interventions countering misinformation, inquiring into their behavioral objectives, theoretical foundations, design and evaluation practices, and the factors that were empirically proven, or speculated, to contribute to interventions' failure. Among others, we identify 17 distinct behavioral objectives, organized into three stages of the online news cycle: composition, amplification and consumption, 24 theoretical frameworks employed in designing these interventions, and nine reasons of failure. We synthesize the findings into a set of design cards with the goal of guiding intervention designers during concept ideation and refinement, and highlight areas for future research.

The importance of behaviorally informed interventions against misinformation is increasingly acknowledged, and the concept of nudging has received attention as a promising approach to promoting conscious decision-making when confronted with online misinformation. Nudges, however, may not always produce the desired behaviors; they may lead to side effects, and even backfire. With nudges most often being studied behaviorally, this article argues for the importance of inquiring into users’ perceptions before deploying nudges in the field. We employ a semi-structured interviewing technique, the Repertory-Grid Technique, to inquire into how end-users, like citizens, journalists and policymakers, perceive six concepts of technology-mediated nudging designed to counter online misinformation. The study identifies nine construct categories, such as respectfulness, proactivity, and simplicity, which participants employed to differentiate among and evaluate the nudges. By considering these constructs during nudge design, choice architects can mitigate risks regarding their acceptance and sustained effectiveness. This study contributes to a growing body of literature on the factors that shape nudge failure.

Interest in technological solutions for combating online misinformation has rapidly grown over the last decade, yet the majority of proposed tools do not consider behavioral theories in their design, nor have they addressed the ways in which individuals could potentially interact with these tools, while omitting the plausible ways in which variations in the design of the interventions may affect end-users’ decision-making and behavioral responses. In this paper, we explore the potential of nudging to inform the design of technological tools that aim to mitigate online misinformation through behavior change. We report on a design workshop where 29 participants were asked to conceive technology-mediated nudges supporting individuals’ decision-making in the production, dissemination or consumption of misinformative content. In producing novel solutions, participants used the “Nudge Deck,” a design support tool that makes nudge theory, and particularly a framework of 23 interaction design mechanisms for nudging, accessible during time-constrained design meetings. We present the outputs of the session and discuss them in light of prior literature with respect to ethics and potential effectiveness.

The idea of nudging - that subtle changes in the 'choice architecture' can alter people's behaviors in predictable ways - was eagerly adopted by HCI researchers and practitioners over the past decade. Yet, the design of effective nudging interventions is far from trivial, with theoretical knowledge being unstructured, with over a hundred cognitive biases found online, and inaccessible to practitioners during design meetings. We present the design and evaluation of the Nudge Deck, a card-based, design support tool that provides actionable knowledge for the design of technology-mediated nudges. The tool was evaluated through two case studies where 58 participants were asked to design nudging interventions, in the contexts of physical activity promotion and misinformation mitigation, with and without the cards. We report on how the cards enhanced designers' self-efficacy, and led to more theoretically grounded, creative and appropriate for the context, ideas.