critical thinking on social media

Smart. Open. Grounded. Inventive. Read our Ideas Made to Matter.

Which program is right for you?

Through intellectual rigor and experiential learning, this full-time, two-year MBA program develops leaders who make a difference in the world.

A rigorous, hands-on program that prepares adaptive problem solvers for premier finance careers.

A 12-month program focused on applying the tools of modern data science, optimization and machine learning to solve real-world business problems.

Earn your MBA and SM in engineering with this transformative two-year program.

Combine an international MBA with a deep dive into management science. A special opportunity for partner and affiliate schools only.

A doctoral program that produces outstanding scholars who are leading in their fields of research.

Bring a business perspective to your technical and quantitative expertise with a bachelor’s degree in management, business analytics, or finance.

A joint program for mid-career professionals that integrates engineering and systems thinking. Earn your master’s degree in engineering and management.

An interdisciplinary program that combines engineering, management, and design, leading to a master’s degree in engineering and management.

Executive Programs

A full-time MBA program for mid-career leaders eager to dedicate one year of discovery for a lifetime of impact.

This 20-month MBA program equips experienced executives to enhance their impact on their organizations and the world.

Non-degree programs for senior executives and high-potential managers.

A non-degree, customizable program for mid-career professionals.

Credit: Pixabay

Social Media

MIT Sloan study finds thinking style impacts how people use social media

MIT Sloan Office of Communications

Feb 11, 2021

Critical thinkers share higher quality content and information than intuitive thinkers

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., Feb. 11, 2021 – Social media has become a significant channel for social interactions, political communications, and marketing. However, little is known about the effect of cognitive style on how people engage with social media. A new study by MIT Sloan Research Affiliate Mohsen Mosleh , MIT Sloan School of Management Prof. David Rand , and their collaborators shows that people who engage in more analytical thinking are more discerning in their social media use, sharing news content from more reliable sources and tweeting about more substantial topics like politics.

“It’s important to understand how people interact on social media and what influences their decisions to share content and follow different accounts. Prior studies have explored the relationship between social media use and personality and demographic measures, but this is the first study to show the connection with cognitive style,” says Rand.

Mosleh, a professor at the University of Exeter Business School, explains, “In the field of cognitive science, some argue that critical thinking doesn’t have much to do with our daily life, but this study shows that it matters – critical thinkers are better able to use social media in meaningful ways, which has become an important part of modern life.”

In their study, the researchers measure Twitter-users cognitive style using the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT), which is a set of questions with intuitively compelling but incorrect answers. For example, participants might be asked” If you are running a race and you pass the person in second place, what place are you in? The answer that intuitively comes to mind for many people is “first place,” however “second place” is the correct answer.

Mosleh points out that there is disagreement in the field of cognitive science about the relative roles of intuition and reflection in people’s everyday lives. Some say humans’ capacity to reflect is underused, and that critical thinking is mostly used to justify our intuitive judgments. Others maintain that critical thinking does have a meaningful impact on beliefs and behaviors and that it increases accuracy.

Their Twitter study confirmed that critical thinking has a significant impact on how users interact on social media. People in the sample who engaged in more cognitive reflection were more discerning in their social media use. They followed more selectively, shared higher quality content from more reliable sources, and tweeted about weightier subjects, particularly politics.

The researchers also found evidence of cognitive “echo chambers,” says Rand. “More intuitive users tended to follow similar types of accounts, which were notably avoided by more analytical users. They also tended to share content related to scams and sales promotions.”

He notes, “This study sheds light on how misinformation and scams are spread on social media, suggesting that lack of thinking is an important contributor to undesirable behavior. It also highlights the type of users at risk of falling for scams.”

As for the importance of cognitive style for everyday behaviors, Rand call this an “important new piece of evidence for the consequences of analytic thinking.”

Rand and Mosleh are coauthors of “Cognitive reflection correlates with behavior on Twitter,” along with MIT Research Associate Antonio Arechar and University of Regina Assistant Professor Gordon Pennycook,which was published in Nature Communications.

About the MIT Sloan School of Management

The MIT Sloan School of Management is where smart, independent leaders come together to solve problems, create new organizations, and improve the world. Learn more at mitsloan.mit.edu .

Related Articles

• Search Search Search …
• Search Search …

Does social media affect critical thinking skills?

The emergence of social media and the reliance on various platforms is increasingly impacting the way in which we interact with each other and the world as a whole. We know that our virtual network is oftentimes as important to us as our physical network and that the information we digest online is significantly influential, but is social media affecting our critical thinking skills? The answer is, yes. Although, for better or worse is the question.

To learn more about how social media is affecting our critical thinking skills and what you can do about it, continue reading.

How is social media affecting critical thinking skills?

In a nutshell, critical thinking skills refer to our ability to analyze, interpret, infer, and problem-solve. These skills typically present themselves in the order of identifying a problem, gathering the data relevant to that problem, analyzing the information we gathered, and making a decision or coming to a solution.

As you can imagine, critical thinking skills require time and mental investment. However, according to research conducted by Stanford University , social media may diminish the amount of mental capacity we spend on any one given problem or task. This is because frequent use of social media tends to interfere with daily interactions, forcing the user to try and split attention between two or more things at a time. This split attention leads to less effective concentration on each given thing, perhaps impacting critical thinking skills negatively.

In addition to the negative impacts of multi-tasking, social media tends to prey on emotion rather than reason. You can thank the algorithms behind your preferred platform for this, as these algorithms deliberately put information in front of you that is targeted to your interest and leanings in any easily digestible format. By seeing information that you already tend to agree with or favor more often than you see information that counters your beliefs, you are being denied the ability to gather all information, analyze appropriately, and come to a more well-informed conclusion.

In other words, you stop questioning. And when you stop questioning, you stop thinking critically.

Does social media affect the critical thinking skills of one group more than another?

The most susceptible to the cognitive and behavioral downfalls of social media use are youth and young adults because they are at an age when their emotional intelligence and critical thinking skills are still immature.

The young are particularly reliant on the positive feedback received through social media, which makes them less likely to be critical of information presented, as they do not want to appear like they are rocking the boat or going against their friends.

The case can be made that peer pressure and bullying are only exacerbated because of social media, which allows for a fear culture to grow in this space that makes sharing one’s opinions a risky move. After all, much of one’s social media presence is built upon being liked, and it would be unpopular to voice any divergent opinions.

Although the younger population is more susceptible to conforming to popular opinions, a 2019 Science Advances study showed that older people, those 65 years old and older, are four times more likely to spread misinformation on social media. Thus, proving that a failure to employ critical thinking skills when using social media is not isolated to the younger population. It is a problem shared by many.

Is there an upside to social media when it comes to critical thinking skills?

In contrast to some of the evidence that social media only harms critical thinking skills, social media, when used right, can be a powerful tool to strengthen one’s critical thinking skills.

With the wealth of information available and competing interests displayed on social media, these platforms can be a resource in developing the ability to scrutinize information and source additional facts to come to more well-informed decisions or more effective solutions to problems.

In order to do this, one needs to be resistant to accepting the first piece of information as the truth before having a chance to validate that information.

What can I do to strengthen my critical thinking skills on social media?

The overwhelming amount of information that is fed to us through social media platforms has made critical thinking skills that much more critical in today’s age. It may be an odd characteristic to cultivate, but skepticism will be your best friend when trying to strengthen your critical thinking skills on social media. And while you are practicing skepticism, there are a few things that you can do on social media today to help you get started:

• Look for credentials or other forms of credibility: One way in which you can tell if you are digesting a credible piece of information is to look at the source of that information. Does that person have credentials or other forms of credibility that lend to the validity of the information? If not, be skeptical, and do your own research.
• Examine the sources: If you are reading an article or blog post that you were directed to by social media, search the page for source links. If the information being presented is credible, the article or blog post will contain links to sources for that information. Better than just scanning for links to sources, you should actually click on those links to see what the sources are. Sources such as national or local newspapers, universities, and government agencies are dependable.
• Check your biases: We all have them, and taking a moment to check your biases when consuming information can go a long way in keeping your critical thinking skills sharp.

In a time when information is king and social media is a big player in spreading that information, it is essential to remain vigilant to the information we are taking in. Questioning what is presented as fact and utilizing the amazing tool that is the web to develop well-informed opinions is the key to honing your critical thinking skills on social media.

You may also like

Fun critical thinking online games for adults

Critical thinking can be a difficult skill to hone, but with some practice and a fun incentive, you can be thinking deeper […]

What is Scenario Thinking?

In a world that is becoming increasingly more unpredictable, planning for the future has become even more of a challenge than it […]

Core critical thinking skills

On a regular basis, people are faced with problems and scenarios that must be assessed and solved. Typically, they are tasked to […]

Examples of Critical Thinking in Everyday

Most people think of high academia when they hear the phrase “critical thinking.” They have a natural tendency to associate it with […]

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Mini review article, the impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review.

• 1 Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, United States
• 2 Independent Researcher, Boston, MA, United States

In our modern society, digital devices, social media platforms, and artificial intelligence (AI) tools have become integral components of our daily lives, profoundly intertwined with our daily activities. These technologies have undoubtedly brought convenience, connectivity, and speed, making our lives easier and more efficient. However, their influence on our brain function and cognitive abilities cannot be ignored. This review aims to explore both the positive and negative impacts of these technologies on crucial cognitive functions, including attention, memory, addiction, novelty-seeking and perception, decision-making, and critical thinking, as well as learning abilities. The review also discusses the differential influence of digital technology across different age groups and the unique challenges and benefits experienced by children, adolescents, adults, and the elderly. Strategies to maximize the benefits of the digital world while mitigating its potential drawbacks are also discussed. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the intricate relationship between humans and technology. It underscores the need for further research in this rapidly evolving field and the importance of informed decision-making regarding our digital engagement to support optimal cognitive function and wellbeing in the digital era.

1 Introduction

In recent years, the proliferation of digital tools, such as smartphones, social media platforms, and artificial intelligence technologies, has ushered in a significant paradigm shift in our interaction with information. These tools have undeniably enriched our lives by offering unparalleled convenience, connectivity, speed, and efficiency. The advent of smartphones, for instance, has made access to information and communication incredibly convenient, enabling us to effortlessly retrieve facts, connect with others, and accomplish various tasks with a simple tap on a screen. Similarly, social media platforms have revolutionized the way we interact and share information, facilitating global connectivity and nurturing communities. Furthermore, artificial intelligence (AI) tools have automated numerous processes, streamlined workflows and enhanced productivity.

The impact of digital tools on brain function and cognition is a complex and intricate area of study that has prompted extensive research by researchers and experts. As we strive to comprehend the effects of technology on our cognitive abilities, it has become increasingly challenging to differentiate between mere correlation and actual causation due to our constant reliance on and utilization of digital tools.

2 Attention

Extensive research in cognitive psychology has demonstrated that humans possess a finite capacity for sustained attention and can only maintain focus on a specific task or stimulus for a limited period of time. This capacity is not fixed and varies depending on several factors such as the nature of the task itself and individual drivers like interest, motivation and personal experience ( Chun et al., 2011 ; Oberauer, 2019 ). However, the rapid rise of digital tools like smartphones, social media, and other forms of technology has brought about new challenges in maintaining sustained focus and have made it easier than ever to be constantly and perpetually distracted. Smartphones, in particular, have become pervasive in modern society, and excessive smartphone use is associated with poorer attentional control ( De-Sola Gutiérrez et al., 2016 ). Social media platforms, such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Tiktok, Threads, and Twitter, have also become major sources of distraction. The constant notifications, updates, and scrolling feeds can draw individuals' attention away from important tasks and create a state of perpetual partial attention. A study by Kross et al. (2013) revealed that passive use of Facebook predicted decreased wellbeing and increased feelings of distraction and inattention.

One of the most significant challenges the digital world poses for attention is attentional overload. Attentional overload occurs when the demands of the environment exceed the capacity of an individual's attentional resources. The digital world presents a wide range of stimuli, including alerts, personalized notifications, social media updates, emails, tweets, calendar reminders, texts, and news feeds, all of which compete for an individual's attention.

The phenomenon of “continuous partial attention” is a symptom of attentional overload in the digital world ( Stone, 2007 ). Continuous partial attention refers to the state of continuously dividing and shifting one's attention across multiple tasks or stimuli without fully immersing oneself and only partially engaging in any one of them. This practice can lead to a superficial understanding of information and a reduced ability to concentrate on any one task or piece of information. We have indeed transitioned now from the information age to the age of interruption ( Firth et al., 2019 ). The irony of our century is the ease with which we can find resources to read at any time and place, but at the expense of having constant distractions interrupting our focus and attention. This can be characterized by the constant urge to stay connected and keep up with various sources of information, often driven by the “fear of missing out” or FOMO ( Przybylski et al., 2013 ). Continuous partial attention is closely related to the influence of digital technologies and the rise of digital tools have amplified the prevalence of such phenomenon ( Oulasvirta et al., 2012 ).

The consequences of continuous partial attention can be detrimental to cognitive performance and overall wellbeing and can lead to reduced productivity, decreased memory retention, and increased stress levels. In addition to continuous partial attention, the digital world can also contribute to attentional overload through multitasking. Multitasking involves the simultaneous performance of two or more tasks, which can reduce the efficiency and accuracy of attentional processing ( Rosen et al., 2013a ). The ability to multitask may lead to a sense of productivity, but it can also lead to a decreased ability to focus and retain information. Moreover, the constant urge to stay connected and respond to notifications can lead to distracted real-life in person conversations and create a diminished sense of presence even in face-to-face interactions thereby hindering deep engagement and empathy in interpersonal relationships ( Turkle, 2011 ).

2.1 Factors contributing to attentional overload in the digital world

Several factors contribute to attentional overload in the digital world. One of the most significant factors is the intentional design of digital devices and platforms. Many digital devices and platforms are designed specifically to be highly engaging, using features such as notifications, alerts, personalized content, reminders and gamification to capture, retain and maintain users' attention ( Dabbish et al., 2011 ). These design features can be effective in promoting engagement but can also contribute to attentional overload. For example, the “infinite scroll” feature and autoplaying of videos on social media platforms, where content continuously loads as users scroll down, encourages endless browsing and can lead to attentional overload. Similarly, the use of bright colors, animations, and interactive elements in application designs aim to stimulate users and maintain their engagement.

Another factor that contributes to attentional overload in the digital world is the sheer volume of information available. The internet provides access to an endless supply of information, and social media platforms generate an ever-increasing stream of content. The abundance of information can create a sense of urgency to stay connected and informed, leading to continuous partial attention and multitasking. Research shows that notifications and alerts from digital tools can disrupt attention and impair cognitive performance ( Iqbal and Horvitz, 2007 ). An average person checks their phone at least 85 times per day ( Andrews et al., 2015 ) and has little awareness of the frequency with which they check their phone and rapid mobile phone interactions and “checking behaviors” are increasingly becoming more and more habitual.

Continuous distractions during the workday can have significant effects on perceived workload and stress levels. When individuals are constantly interrupted or diverted from their tasks, their ability to concentrate and maintain productivity is compromised. This can lead to an increased perception of workload as tasks take longer to complete due to the interruptions. Individuals tend to compensate for the distractions by working harder to make up for lost time or to regain focus on their tasks and this increased effort results in higher frustration and stress levels ( Mark et al., 2008 ). Another study explored the effects of interruptions on employees' wellbeing and job satisfaction ( Trougakos et al., 2008 ) and reported that frequent interruptions disrupted workflow, leading to increased psychological strain and decreased job satisfaction. The researchers suggested that interruptions not only increased perceived workload but also contributed to a sense of time pressure and reduced work engagement. These findings align with the concept of cognitive load theory, which suggests that cognitive resources are limited, and multitasking or continuous distractions can overwhelm these resources, leading to increased perceived workload and stress ( Sweller, 2011 ).

The constant use of digital tools can impact the brain's ability to focus and sustain attention. Heavy multitaskers performed worse on a task that required sustained attention than those who were light multitaskers ( Ophir et al., 2009 ). Children who used digital tools for more than 2 h per day had lower scores on cognitive tests than those who used them less ( Firth et al., 2019 ). Students could only focus for 6 min in the presence of a technological distractor such as texting, social media updates, and digital task-switching on other windows ( Rosen et al., 2013a ). Studies show that students who were distracted by text messages during lectures performed worse on comprehension tests compared to those who were not distracted ( Rosen et al., 2011 ). In addition, although video games can improve certain aspects of attention, such as selective attention and visual-spatial processing, excessive use may also lead to attentional difficulties, such as reduced sustained attention and increased distractibility, particularly in children ( Bavelier et al., 2010 ). Higher levels of digital media use, particularly multitasking with multiple devices, have been associated with lower academic achievement ( Junco and Cotten, 2012 ).

Several studies have also found an association between extensive use of digital devices and symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). While it is important to note that correlation does not imply causation, the research suggests a potential link between digital device use and ADHD symptoms. Higher levels of screen time, including television viewing, video gaming, and computer use, are associated with an increased likelihood of experiencing ADHD symptoms ( Nikkelen et al., 2014 ). The constant stimulation and rapid shifts in attention demanded by digital media may contribute to attentional difficulties resembling ADHD symptoms. A reciprocal relationship, with higher digital media use predicting increased ADHD symptoms, and higher ADHD symptoms predicting increased digital has also been reported ( Sibley and Coxe, 2018 ; Adelantado-Renau et al., 2019 ) suggesting that excessive digital media use and ADHD symptoms may reinforce each other in a complex manner. Correlations have also been observed between screen media use and ADHD symptoms in children and adolescents ( Ra et al., 2020 ). While these studies provide insights into the potential association between digital device use and ADHD symptoms, it is important to consider that the nature of this association is still not fully understood and further research is required to establish the directionality and underlying mechanisms. Other factors, such as pre-existing tendencies or underlying vulnerabilities, may influence both digital device use and the manifestation of such symptoms.

Individuals who frequently engage in media multitasking (e.g., using multiple digital devices simultaneously) have reduced gray matter density in the anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region associated with cognitive and emotional regulation which suggests that digital media use may have a negative impact on brain structure and function ( Loh and Kanai, 2014 ).

Digital dementia is a term used to describe the decline in cognitive abilities caused by excessive use of digital technology ( Spitzer, 2012 ). This phenomenon has become a growing concern, particularly among younger generations, who are more likely to be connected to digital devices than ever before. Studies have shown that digital dementia can lead to a range of cognitive impairments, including memory loss, attention deficit, reduced ability to communicate, and impaired decision-making abilities ( Manwell et al., 2022 ).

The overreliance on digital technology is one of the primary causes of digital dementia. When individuals rely on digital devices to store information, they are less likely to remember it over the long term, leading to memory loss. Studies indicate that overreliance on technology for even simple tasks can lead to decreased performance in memory recall. Studies suggest that people have become increasingly reliant on search engines like Google to access information, rather than remembering the information itself. For example, a simple action such as using smartphones or “Google calendar” to remind of appointments, deadlines and essential tasks enable one to offload this task from our memory to our “external memory”: the internet ( Sparrow et al., 2011 ). Increased usage of GPS has also been linked to steeper declines in hippocampal-dependent spatial memory ( Dahmani and Bohbot, 2020 ). In addition, even taking digital photographs seem to decrease recall accuracy for details of images ( Henkel, 2014 ).

Furthermore, the constant barrage of information and distractions that come with digital technology can overload the brain, making it difficult to process information and retain it ( Lin et al., 2015 ). Individuals who use smartphones more frequently also have shorter attention spans than those who used them less often ( Lui and Wong, 2012 ).

Research has also shown that excessive use of digital technology can alter brain structure and function, leading to a range of cognitive impairments. Internet addiction was associated with reduced gray matter density in the brain's frontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making and impulse control ( Chen et al., 2023 ). Smartphone addiction has also been associated with reduced activity in the prefrontal cortex, which is responsible for decision-making and impulse control ( Lin et al., 2015 ).

In one study, participants were divided into three groups: one group was allowed to use their phones during a lecture, one group was asked to place their phones face down on the desk, and one group was asked to leave their phones outside the room. The results showed that the group that used their phones during the lecture had the lowest recall of the lecture material ( Thornton et al., 2014 ). In fact, just the mere presence of a cell phone alone and the digital accessibility it represents itself was found to be distracting. Similarly, the use of smartphones during a memory task can decrease accuracy. In another study, participants who used their phone during the task to remember words had lower accuracy compared to those who did not use their phone ( Ward et al., 2017 ).

The constant stream of information from digital tools can also impair our ability to retain information over time. Cain et al. (2016) reported an association between increased media multitasking and poorer working memory performance and lower academic outcomes. In addition, college students with increased levels of Facebook usage demonstrated worse outcomes on cognitive tasks such as free recall activities ( Frein et al., 2013 ). Participants who reported using Facebook more frequently also had lower gray matter density in the anterior cingulate cortex, a brain region involved in memory and emotional regulation ( Kanai et al., 2012 ).

There is also evidence to suggest that the use of digital tools can impact brain function in other ways. For example, a study found that heavy social media use was associated with decreased gray matter volume in the amygdala, a brain region involved in emotion regulation ( Montag et al., 2017 ). Another study found that participants who were heavy users of video games had smaller gray matter volume in the hippocampus, a brain region involved in spatial memory ( Kühn and Gallinat, 2014 ). Excessive use of digital devices has also been linked to cognitive impairments resembling those seen in dementia. Interestingly, these effects are increasingly observed in younger adults who are not typically expected to experience age-related neurodegeneration associated with old age ( Manwell et al., 2022 ).

Despite these findings, it's important to note that not all digital tools are created equal, and some may even have positive effects on memory and cognitive function. Playing action video games improved memory and attention in older adults ( Anguera et al., 2013 ). Similarly, Social media use can also influence self-referential processing, where individuals reflect on their own traits and qualities. A study by He et al. (2017) found that the frequent use of WeChat, a popular social media application, was positively correlated with gray matter volume in the precuneus, suggesting that heavy social media use may be linked to changes in brain structure in regions associated with self-referential processing.

Regardless it remains important to mitigate the negative effects of digital dementia. Several potential solutions have been proposed and one of the most effective is to limit digital technology use, particularly among younger generations. This could involve setting limits on screen time and encouraging activities that stimulate the brain, such as reading, exercising, and socializing with friends and family. Another solution is to incorporate brain training exercises into daily routines, such as memory games and puzzles, to help maintain cognitive abilities.

4 Addiction

Addiction is becoming a growing concern due to the widespread use of technology. Addiction can lead to changes in cognitive function, impacting one's ability to think critically, remember important details, and make sound decisions. The instant gratification and constant stimulation provided by technology can create a compulsive need for more leading to addiction.

Internet addiction has been associated with reduced attention span and working memory as well as impaired decision-making, specifically in the area of risk assessment ( Dong et al., 2013 ). Smartphone addiction is associated with decreased cognitive function ( Lee et al., 2017 ) and deficits in attention and executive function such as inhibition and working memory ( Lin et al., 2015 ).

Moreover, addiction in the digital world can also impact social cognition, which refers to the ability to understand and interact with others. Internet addiction is associated with decreased empathy, which is an important component of social cognition ( Tao et al., 2010 ). Excessive use of social networking sites is associated with decreased social skills and a decreased ability to recognize facial emotions ( Błachnio et al., 2016 ). In addition, symptoms of digital technology and internet addiction can include withdrawal symptoms when the internet is inaccessible ( Kuss and Griffiths, 2012 ). Some users may also develop an emotional attachment to online friends and digital activities which can contribute to their addictive desire to maintain their online presence ( Young, 1998 ). People with internet addiction show impairment of white matter fibers in the brain connecting regions involved in generations of emotions and cognitive control as well ( Zhou et al., 2011 ). Furthermore, frequent exposure to emotionally arousing content, such as social media posts or online news, can disrupt emotional regulation processes and contribute to heightened stress, anxiety, and depressive symptoms. Excessive social media use is associated with increased emotional reactivity and decreased emotional recovery, indicating difficulties in regulating emotional responses ( Puukko et al., 2020 ).

Addictive behaviors have been tied to changes in the brain's reward system. The brain's reward system plays a crucial role in regulating motivation, decision-making, and self-control. Digital technology, with its array of engaging content and online activities, can hijack this reward system, leading to potential challenges in self-control and psychological regulation. Research has shown that excessive digital use, particularly related to activities such as social media and gaming, can trigger addictive behaviors by activating the brain's reward circuitry. This activation is mediated by the release of dopamine, a neurotransmitter associated with pleasure and reward ( Báez-Mendoza and Schultz, 2013 ).

Excessive online gaming has been linked to alterations in the reward system, including increased activation in reward-related brain regions ( Kuss et al., 2014 ). Studies have demonstrated that heavy digital media use is associated with lower levels of reward self-control. Individuals who frequently engage in media multitasking exhibited reduced reward self-control, leading to impulsive decision-making and decreased academic performance ( Wilmer et al., 2017 ). Similarly, a negative correlation between social media use and reward self-control has been observed, indicating that higher levels of social media engagement were associated with weaker self-control abilities ( Meshi et al., 2019 ).

In addition, the ventral striatum, a key part of the reward system, has been associated with compulsive internet use ( Kuss and Griffiths, 2012 ). Brain responses observed in individuals with internet gaming disorder when they were winning or losing money found increased activity in the ventral striatum when these individuals anticipated winning, which may reflect an increased sensitivity to potential rewards ( Dong et al., 2012 ).

Research using neuroimaging techniques has shown that individuals with problematic internet use exhibit structural and functional changes in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC). These areas of the brain are critical for higher cognitive functions such as decision-making, impulse control, and emotion regulation. Adolescents with internet addiction exhibited decreased gray matter density in several brain areas, including the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and the rostral ACC ( Yuan et al., 2011 ). The DLPFC is implicated in executive functions such as decision making and cognitive control, whereas the ACC is involved in emotion processing and regulation. Functional changes in these brain areas have also been reported. An fMRI study observed that individuals with internet gaming addiction showed heightened activation in the PFC during a decision-making task, which may suggest impaired cognitive control and decision-making ability ( Dong et al., 2012 ). Similarly, individuals with internet gaming disorder exhibited impaired function in the ACC during a color-word Stroop task, which assesses cognitive control and response inhibition ( Dong et al., 2013 ). Apart from structural and functional changes, alterations in the functional connectivity between these brain regions have also been observed. Individuals with internet gaming addiction showed altered resting-state functional connectivity between several regions, including the ACC and the PFC which might reflect a dysfunction in the neural network involving these areas, which is implicated in cognitive control and emotional regulation ( Hong et al., 2013 ).

Digital technology's impact on the brain extends beyond addiction and the reward system and can affect broader psychological regulation processes. Excessive digital use can disrupt the brain's reward system, impair reward self-control, and affect broader psychological regulation processes. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for promoting healthy digital habits and maintaining psychological wellbeing. To foster better reward self-control and psychological regulation, interventions such as digital detoxes, mindfulness practices, and promoting offline activities are recommended. Further research is needed to delve deeper into the specific mechanisms underlying the impact of digital technology on reward self-control and psychological regulation and to develop effective strategies for mitigating potential negative consequences.

5 Novelty seeking and perception

Novelty seeking is a fundamental aspect of cognition associated with exploration, curiosity, and the desire for new experiences ( Kashdan et al., 2004 ). Digital technology, with its virtually endless availability of new content, has dramatically reshaped novelty seeking behaviors.

The internet, social media, and various digital platforms introduce an abundance of novel stimuli, thus reinforcing novelty-seeking behavior ( Achterberg et al., 2022 ). On one hand, this fosters curiosity and broadens intellectual horizons. However, the overload of novel information can lead to cognitive fatigue and a skewed perception of reality due to the selection and amplification of certain types of content ( Eppler and Mengis, 2004 ). Social media platforms can create echo chambers and filter bubbles acting as altered perceptual filters. These personalized information ecosystems selectively present information that aligns with users' preexisting beliefs and preferences, potentially distorting perception and reinforcing biases ( Pariser, 2011 ). The vast offerings of the digital world offer immersive and interactive experiences through visual and audiovisual content. Virtual reality, augmented reality, and multimedia applications can enhance perception by providing realistic and engaging learning experiences ( Boucsein, 2019 ) however they also provide uniquely immersive experiences, altering our perception of physical space ( Bohil et al., 2011 ). These technologies enhance experiential learning but also present challenges, such as disorientation and a blurred distinction between the virtual and physical world.

In addition to influencing the width of perception, digital use can exponentially aid in increasing exposure and accessibility to diverse and constantly changing stimuli which can contribute to increased novelty seeking behavior. Studies have shown that individuals who frequently use digital media tend to seek out novel and stimulating experiences ( Przybylski et al., 2013 ). A study by Carrier et al. (2015) found that heavy internet users were more likely to display signs of impulsivity, suggesting that the instant feedback provided by the online environment might promote a need for instant gratification. Many digital platforms also often incorporate gamification elements, rewards, and personalized recommendations and such features act to reinforce novelty seeking behaviors by providing immediate feedback and tailored content based on users' preferences and past engagement ( Hamari et al., 2014 ).

It is undeniable that digital technologies can provide opportunities for discovery, exploration, and learning through exposure to new and diverse information and help to foster creativity, curiosity, and adaptability, which are valuable traits in the modern world ( Nussbaum et al., 2021 ). However, it is still critical to note that excessive novelty seeking and underestimating personalization of content presented in the digital realm may lead to a constant search for new stimuli, potentially detracting from focused and sustained learning. It can also contribute to information overload, reduced depth of understanding, and difficulties in maintaining attention and self-regulation ( Rosen et al., 2013b ).

Furthermore, in the realm of social perception, digital technology significantly influences how we perceive and interact with others. Online communications can amplify misunderstandings due to the lack of non-verbal cues, altering the perception of others' intentions and emotions. Digital communication platforms often give rise to an “egocentral bias” where individuals tend to overestimate their ability to communicate attitudes, emotions, and sarcasm through digital means and can potentially lead to inaccurate perceptions of other's intentions and emotions ( Kruger et al., 2005 ). In addition, the comparative nature of social media can lead to a skewed and biased perception of others' lives, often perceived as more successful or happier, leading to a phenomenon known as “Facebook envy” ( Krasnova et al., 2013 ). This altered perception can have significant impacts on mental health, leading to feelings of inadequacy and decreased overall satisfaction in life. Personalized algorithms on social media platforms can result in focused content, where users are exposed primarily to topics and opinions that align with their own ( Bakshy et al., 2015 ) which can lead to a narrow perception of social reality and polarization in opinions and beliefs.

Perception of self in the digital sphere is also an interesting aspect. Studies have found that individuals tend to curate their online avatars and identities positively and attractively. This is partly due to the “hyperpersonal effect” ( Walther, 1996 ), where people utilize the asynchronous nature of digital communication to selectively self-present, leading to an idealized version of oneself. This self-presentation can significantly influence how we perceive others and ourselves, often creating a gap between reality and digital identity.

While the digital era has enhanced our spatial perception through immersive technologies and enriched our social interactions by bridging geographical gaps, it has also introduced complications. Misunderstandings due to the absence of non-verbal cues, potential distortions in self and others' perception due to online identity curation, and the formation of echo chambers and filter bubbles are amongst the challenges that require careful consideration. As we embrace the next digital evolution, it is essential to strike a balance. We must leverage the benefits of digital technology in promoting novelty seeking and enriching perception, while also being mindful of, and mitigating, the potential drawbacks. This necessitates ongoing research to understand these effects better and to devise strategies for optimal digital engagement. Ultimately, the key lies in utilizing digital technology as a tool for cognitive enhancement, enriching our novelty seeking and perceptual experiences, rather than letting it become a source of cognitive distress. This will enable us to harness the power of digital technology for cognitive wellbeing and development in our increasingly digitized world.

6 Decision-making

Digital technology has vastly influenced the cognitive process of decision making, affecting how we gather, process, and evaluate information to make choices. These influences have both empowering and potentially disruptive implications.

The rise of digital technology has significantly enhanced our ability to access a wealth of information. Increasing internet usage has led to more informed decision making due to a broader range of accessible data. However, the overwhelming volume of information available can lead to information overload, complicating the decision-making process and potentially causing decision paralysis ( Eppler and Mengis, 2004 ). Cognitive overload occurs when the brain is exposed to an excessive amount of information or stimuli, which can overwhelm the brain's capacity to process it all ( Sweller, 1994 ). In one study, participants who spent more time on social networking sites showed a higher level of cognitive overload, leading to a decrease in their ability to make decisions ( Junco and Cotten, 2012 ). This finding highlights the importance of limiting digital use to avoid cognitive overload, which can impair decision-making skills.

Algorithm-driven recommendations have become a cornerstone of digital platforms, helping users make choices in various contexts, from online shopping to entertainment. While these algorithms can streamline decision making by providing tailored options ( Li et al., 2019 ), they can also lead to cognitive biases. These biases, in turn, can reduce exposure to diverse perspectives, leading to sub-optimal decisions and perpetuating confirmation bias ( Pariser, 2011 ). Social media platforms can also significantly influence decision making by providing immediate access to peer opinions and reviews, which have been shown to greatly impact consumer decision making ( Hajli, 2014 ). However, they also lead to the risk of groupthink, where peer pressure can impact individual decision-making processes and outcomes ( Janis, 1972 ). Face-to-face social interactions are important for developing social skills and practicing decision-making in real-life situations. Social media use has been negatively associated with face-to-face social interactions, which can impact the development of social skills and decision-making abilities as well ( Pontes et al., 2018 ).

Digital distractions are another aspect of technology that can impact decision making. Continuous digital distractions might reduce the cognitive capacity for careful deliberation, leading to more impulsive decisions ( Duke and Montag, 2017 ). Participants who were interrupted by a text message while performing a decision-making task showed a decrease in the quality of their decisions, highlighting the impact of digital distractions on decision-making skills ( Mark et al., 2017 ). Furthermore, excessive use of digital technology, particularly smartphones, can induce cognitive offloading, which refers to the reliance on external tools for cognitive functions, including decision making, potentially reducing our cognitive capabilities ( Ward et al., 2017 ).

Digital use can impair decision-making skills by causing addiction-like behavior. Digital devices and technology can be highly addictive, leading to excessive use and a decrease in self-control. People who used their phones more frequently had a harder time delaying gratification and were more likely to make impulsive decisions ( Rosen et al., 2013b ). Excessive digital use can lead to addiction-like behavior and impaired decision-making skills ( Billieux et al., 2015 ).

In addition, digital use can lead to a decrease in critical thinking skills, which can further impair decision-making abilities. Participants who were exposed to social media posts with misleading information showed a decrease in their ability to critically evaluate the information presented, leading to impaired decision-making skills ( Aïmeur et al., 2023 ). Furthermore, video game addiction was associated with lower self-control and impulsive decision-making ( Gentile et al., 2012 ). These findings suggest that excessive digital use can impair decision-making skills by decreasing self-control and increasing impulsivity.

To mitigate the impact of digital use on decision-making skills, it is important to develop critical thinking skills and establish healthy digital habits. Individuals who engaged in critical thinking while using social media were less likely to be influenced by misleading information, highlighting the importance of developing critical thinking skills in the digital age ( Machete and Turpin, 2020 ). Setting boundaries on screen time and taking breaks from digital devices can help reduce cognitive overload and increase self-control. Additionally, engaging in face-to-face social interactions can help develop social skills and improve decision-making abilities.

7 Critical thinking and learning abilities

Constant distractions of the digital world can lead to a decreased ability to concentrate and think deeply ( Carr, 2020 ). Students who spent more time on Facebook had lower GPAs than those who spent less time on the social networking site ( Junco and Cotten, 2012 ). The researchers concluded that excessive use of social media can interfere with academic performance. Similarly, students who used multiple digital devices simultaneously had lower comprehension scores compared to those who used only one device ( Rosen et al., 2013a ). The internet is changing the way we think and process information, leading to shallower and more distracted thinking.

Digital devices have also been linked to a decrease in attention span, which can impact learning. Participants who used smartphones more frequently had shorter attention spans than those who used them less often ( Lui and Wong, 2012 ). In addition, excessive digital media use is associated with poorer cognitive control, including attention and inhibitory control ( Fossati et al., 2018 ). Furthermore, digital devices have been linked to disrupted sleep patterns, which can also affect learning. Adolescents who used electronic devices at bedtime had increased sleep problems and daytime sleepiness, which can impair cognitive function and academic performance ( Hysing et al., 2015 ). Research has also shown that greater screen time in children is associated with lower cortical thickness, particularly in areas associated with language and literacy skills ( Paulus et al., 2019 ).

There are several possible mechanisms through which digital device use can impair learning brain function. One mechanism is through the effects of blue light emitted by digital screens. Blue light has been shown to suppress melatonin production, which can disrupt the sleep-wake cycle and impair cognitive function ( Cajochen et al., 2011 ). Another possible mechanism is through the effects of digital media on brain structure and function. Lin et al. (2015) found that prolonged internet use was associated with reduced gray matter density in the anterior cingulate cortex, which is involved in cognitive and emotional processing. Excessive video gaming has also been associated with reduced gray matter volume in the striatum, which is involved in reward processing and impulse control ( Kühn and Gallinat, 2014 ).

7.1 Artificial intelligence

Artificial intelligence (AI) is progressively intertwined with human cognition, impacting how we think, learn, make decisions, and interact with the world. AI tools can aid in cognitive tasks, enhancing human capabilities. AI is increasingly used in decision-making processes. For example, AI algorithms can analyze vast data sets to detect patterns and trends, something human cognitive function may find overwhelming due to inherent limitations ( Gunning et al., 2019 ). These algorithms can help humans make data-driven decisions and offer recommendations. AI-driven tools like IBM's Watson have been used in healthcare to help physicians make more informed decisions by providing valuable data-driven insights ( Ferrucci et al., 2010 ). However, as with cognitive offloading, there is a potential risk that over-reliance on AI for decision-making could diminish human capacity for critical thinking ( Rudin, 2019 ). AI-based GPS navigation systems such as “Google Maps” or “Waze” not only help us navigate through unfamiliar environments but may also affect brain areas related to spatial cognition and navigation skills ( Iaria et al., 2009 ).

AI also has profound implications for learning processes. Adaptive learning platforms like Carnegie Learning provide personalized learning experiences tailored to individual needs, which can enhance learning outcomes ( Graesser et al., 2018 ). AI can identify a learner's predominant learning style and provide content accordingly. If a student is a visual learner, AI may deliver content through visual aids, animations, or videos and may emphasize textual materials if the student is more inclined toward reading or writing. AI can also adapt to each learner's own pace and style, providing personalized content ensuring engagement and better understanding and retention of materials ( Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019 ). In addition, AI is capable of providing real-time feedback, which can enhance learning by immediately addressing misconceptions and reinforcing concepts ( Hattie and Timperley, 2007 ; Shute, 2008 ). Interactive AI-powered toys and educational tools can provide personalized learning experiences that can enhance cognitive development ( Chowdhury et al., 2020 ). However, there are concerns about children's over-reliance on AI tools for problem-solving and decision-making. Children need opportunities to tackle challenges and learn skills to solve problems independently, a process that can be circumvented by AI, potentially affecting the development of these skills ( Chiong and Shuler, 2010 ). However, the role of AI in learning also raises questions about the nature of learning and the value of human teachers.

AI has implications for social cognition as well. Interactions with social robots or AI chatbots can influence our perceptions, attitudes, and social interactions ( Broadbent, 2017 ). AI tools like Woebot, are being used to provide mental health support. These bots can provide cognitive-behavioral therapy-based interventions, thereby potentially improving mental wellbeing and making therapy more accessible ( Fitzpatrick et al., 2017 ; Vaidyam et al., 2019 ). This suggests a possible influence on brain areas associated with emotional regulation, like the prefrontal cortex and the amygdala. Although these findings are promising, it is important to note that AI tools are best used as a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, traditional therapy. Chatbots lack the ability to understand and respond to complex human emotions ( Clarke and Yarborough, 2013 ). Digital applications such as “Headspace” and “Calm” guide users through meditation practices and can help in reducing mental stress, improving attention and focus and enhance cognitive resilience ( Bostock et al., 2019 ).

It is also important to recognize AI tools such as ChatGPT, that has been designed to process natural language and generate text in response to various queries. They can help users explore different and new perspectives, supporting informed decision making ( Carr, 2020 ). Language model tools can also help language acquisition and development and act as a resource for learning new language or practicing conversation in a non-judgmental environment ( Hill et al., 2015 ). Applications such as “Duolingo” utilize AI to adapt to a user's learning style and pace, presenting new words and exercises based on previous performance. Personalization in these type of softwares can help enhance language learning efficiencies ( Duolingo, 2020 ). Such applications can also be used for language proficiency tests ( Settles et al., 2020 ). Notably, there are AI technologies being developed to detect early signs of dementia through speech and language patterns analyzing short snippets of speech to predict and monitor cognitive decline ( Kwak et al., 2021 ). AI-powered brain-computer interfaces such as “Neuralink” are also being worked on that can august human cognition ( Musk and Neuralink, 2020 ). Virtual reality (VR) environments powered by AI, such as those offered by “OxfordVR” provide immersive experiences that can improve cognitive responses to real-life scenarios ( Freeman et al., 2018 ).

Over-reliance on ChatGPT or similar AI platforms for answers and academic work and information can reduce an individual's ability to think critically and develop independent thought. These AI tools enable one to obtain quick answers and solutions to a wide range of questions and requests which can be tempting for individuals to rely on exclusively. However, this can limit an individual's ability to evaluate and analyze information critically and develop their own ideas and opinions.

8 Age groups

Digital use has differential influences across different age groups, with varying effects on children, young adults, and older adults. Understanding the specific effects and developmental factors that moderate these effects is crucial for promoting healthy and beneficial digital engagement across the lifespan.

8.1 Children

The effect of digital use on children is of great importance. On one hand interactive applications and digital media can not only enhance cognitive skills, creativity, digital literacy and an avenue to educate themselves. On the other hand, excessive and unmoderated digital use during childhood has been associated with adverse outcomes such as reduced attention spans, lower academic performances, and socio-emotional challenges due to limited social interactions. Mobile devise use in toddlers was associated with lower expressive language skills ( Radesky et al., 2014 ) and excessive screen time has been linked to deficits in cognitive development in children ( Nikken and Schols, 2015 ).

8.2 Young adults

Young adults are the most engaged age groups when it comes to digital technology, with widespread use of social networking and social media platforms as well as entertainment and online communication channels. The impact of digital use on young adults can affect and influence various aspects of their lives such as their mental health, academic performance and socio-emotional status. The excessive use of social media platforms has been associated with negative psychological effects amongst young adults ( Lin et al., 2016 ). The societal pressures relating to fashion, body weight, body image, self-esteem, facial features and socio-economic comparisons on social media platforms can have negative effects on wellbeing ( Perloff, 2014 ). In addition, excessive engagements with digital technology, such as excessive use of Facebook, has been linked to lower academic performance among college students ( Junco, 2012 ). Developmental factors such as time management skills and the ability to balance online and offline activities can moderate the impact of digital use on young adults ( Kirschner and Karpinski, 2010 ). Additionally, digital use can also affect socio-emotional development. For example, excessive social media use has been linked to higher levels of loneliness and depressive symptoms in adolescents ( Primack et al., 2017 ). Developmental factors such as limited self-regulation skills and vulnerability to peer influence may amplify these effects ( Odgers et al., 2019 ).

8.3 Older adults

While older adults may have lower rates of digital technology adoption, their engagement is increasing. Digital use among older adults can have potential benefits, including enhanced cognitive functioning, social connectedness, and access to health information. Cognitive training through digital platforms such as through computer programs, smartphone apps, wearables or web-based platforms offer exercises designed to target specific cognitive domains, such as memory, attention, and executive function, with the goal of improving overall cognitive abilities and everyday functioning ( Ziegler et al., 2022 ). Social media use has also been associated with reduced loneliness and improved social support among older adults ( Cotten et al., 2014 ). Engaging with digital technology, particularly brain-training apps and interactive games, has been found to have positive effects on cognitive abilities in older adults as well ( Anguera et al., 2013 ). These activities can contribute to improvements in memory, attention, and problem-solving skills. Factors such as digital literacy, previous experience with technology, and personal preferences may influence the extent to which digital technology positively impacts cognitive abilities in older adults ( Charness and Boot, 2009 ). Older adults may face challenges such as usability barriers, cognitive decline, and social isolation in their engagement with digital technology ( Van Deursen and Van Dijk, 2011 ).

It is, therefore, important to consider age-appropriate guidelines and interventions that address the potential risks and benefits of digital technology for each age group. Further research is needed to explore the longitudinal effects of digital use on different age groups and to develop age-specific strategies for optimizing the benefits while mitigating potential risks.

9 Strategies to maximize benefits

Digital technology has transformed the way we live, work, and communicate. While these tools have many benefits, such as increased productivity, enhanced learning opportunities, and improved social connections, they also have a negative impact on brain development and cognitive function. However, there are many ways that this can be mitigated to exploit the benefits of the digital world. Easy habits such as

• Digital Detox: periods of abstinence from digital devices can restore cognitive functions and reduce stress levels ( Duke and Montag, 2017 ). A digital detox can be done by scheduling screen-free spaces (digital-free zones at home), technology-free time periods or using old-fashioned alternatives (like reading a paper book or newspaper), or by spending more time outdoors. Take planned and regular breaks when using digital tools.

• Mindful Technology Use: encouraging mindful engagement with digital tools and social medica can limit overuse and foster healthier habits. This involves conscious decision-making about when, where, and how to use digital tools ( Rosen et al., 2013a ).

• Exercise and Physical Activity: regular physical activity can help counterbalance some of the negative impacts of excessive screen time. Exercise improves cognitive function, reduces anxiety and depression, and improves sleep quality ( Sibley and Etnier, 2003 ).

• Training in Media Literacy and Digital Skills: educational programs can equip individuals with the skills to critically evaluate digital content, use digital tools responsibly, and understand their own digital habits ( Hobbs, 2010 ). Utilizing mobile applications that help to track and limit time on certain applications and devices can also be encouraged.

• Setting up timers to focus on focused tasks: these habits can help in reducing digital distractions and thereby reduce the demands on their attentional resources and focus more effectively on the task at hand. Focusing on a single task at a time can improve performance and reduce feelings of stress ( Ophir et al., 2009 ).

Further research is needed to better understand the complex relationship between technology and the brain, and to determine optimal ways to use digital tools for optimal cognitive health.

Author contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Achterberg, M., Becht, A., van der Cruijsen, R., van de Groep, I. H., Spaans, J. P., Klapwijk, E., et al. (2022). Longitudinal associations between social media use, mental well-being and structural brain development across adolescence. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 54, 101088. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101088

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Adelantado-Renau, M., Moliner-Urdiales, D., Cavero-Redondo, I., Beltran-Valls, M. R., Martínez-Vizcaíno, V., and Álvarez-Bueno, C. (2019). association between screen media use and academic performance among children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 173, 1058–1067. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2019.3176

Aïmeur, E., Amri, S., and Brassard, G. (2023). Fake news, disinformation and misinformation in social media: a review. Soc. Netw. Anal. Min. 13, 30. doi: 10.1007/s13278-023-01028-5

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Andrews, S., Ellis, D. A., Shaw, H., and Piwek, L. (2015). Beyond self-report: tools to compare estimated and real-world smartphone use. PLoS ONE 10, e0139004. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139004

Anguera, J. A., Boccanfuso, J., Rintoul, J. L., Al-Hashimi, O., Faraji, F., Janowich, J., et al. (2013). Video game training enhances cognitive control in older adults. Nature 501, 97–101. doi: 10.1038/nature12486

Báez-Mendoza, R., and Schultz, W. (2013). Decision neuroscience. Front. Neurosci. 7, 233. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2013.00233

Bakshy, E., Messing, S., and Adamic, L. A. (2015). Exposure to ideologically diverse news and opinion on Facebook. Science 348, 1130–1132. doi: 10.1126/science.aaa1160

Bavelier, D., Green, C. S., and Dye, M. W. (2010). Children, wired: for better and for worse. Neuron 67, 692–701. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.035

Billieux, J., Van der Linden, M., and Rochat, L. (2015). The role of impulsivity in actual and problematic use of the mobile phone. Appl. Cogn. Psychol. 29, 525–533. doi: 10.1002/acp.1429

Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., and Pantic, I. (2016). Association between Facebook addiction, self-esteem and life satisfaction: a cross-sectional study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 55, 701–705. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.10.026

Bohil, C. J., Alicea, B., and Biocca, F. A. (2011). Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 12, 752–762. doi: 10.1038/nrn3122

Bostock, S., Crosswell, A. D., Prather, A. A., and Steptoe, A. (2019). Mindfulness on-the-go: effects of a mindfulness meditation app on work stress and well-being. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 24, 127. doi: 10.1037/ocp0000118

Boucsein, W. (2019). Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Human Performance . Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Google Scholar

Broadbent, E. (2017). Interactions with robots: the truths we reveal about ourselves. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 68, 627–652. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958

Cain, M. S., Leonard, J. A., Gabrieli, J. D., and Finn, A. S. (2016). Media multitasking in adolescence. Psychon. Bull. Rev . 23, 1932–1941. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1036-3

Cajochen, C., Frey, S., Anders, D., Späti, J., Bues, M., Pross, A., et al. (2011). Evening exposure to a light-emitting diodes (LED)-backlit computer screen affects circadian physiology and cognitive performance. J. Appl. Physiol. 110, 1432–1438. doi: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00165.2011

Carr, N. (2020). The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains . New York, NY: W. W. Norton and Company.

Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., and Lim, A. F. (2015). Causes, effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Dev. Rev. 35, 64–78. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2014.12.005

Charness, N., and Boot, W. R. (2009). Aging and information technology use: potential and barriers. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18, 253–258. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01647.x

Chen, H., Dong, G., and Li, K. (2023). Overview on brain function enhancement of Internet addicts through exercise intervention: based on reward-execution-decision cycle. Front. Psychiatry 14, 1094583. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1094583

Chiong, C., and Shuler, C. (2010). Learning: Is There an App for That? Investigations of Young Children's Usage and Learning with Mobile Devices and Apps . New York, NY: The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.

Chowdhury, M. R., Ferdous, S. M. S., and Quarles, J. (2020). “Play and learn: designing an AI-based preschool learning tool,” in Proceedings of the 2020 ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference: Extended Abstracts (New York, ACM), 51–57.

Chun, M. M., Golomb, J. D., and Turk-Browne, N. B. (2011). A taxonomy of external and internal attention. Ann. Rev. Psychol. 62, 73–101. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100427

Clarke, G., and Yarborough, B. J. (2013). Evaluating the promise of health IT to enhance/expand the reach of mental health services. Gen. Hosp. Psychiatry 35, 339–344. doi: 10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2013.03.013

Cotten, S. R., Ford, G., Ford, S., and Hale, T. M. (2014). Internet use and depression among retired older adults in the United States: a longitudinal analysis. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 69, 763–771. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu018

Dabbish, L., Mark, G., and Gonzalez, V. (2011). “Why do i keep interrupting myself? environment, habit and self-interruption,” in Proceedings of the 2011 Annual Conference on Human Factors in, Computing Systems (CHI '11) (New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery), 3127–3130. doi: 10.1145/1978942.1979405

Dahmani, L., and Bohbot, V. D. (2020). Habitual use of GPS negatively impacts spatial memory during self-guided navigation. Sci. Rep . 10, 6310. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-62877-0

De-Sola Gutiérrez, J., Rodríguez de Fonseca, F., and Rubio, G. (2016). Cell-phone addiction: a review. Front. Psychiatry 7, 175. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00175

Dong, G., Huang, J., and Du, X. (2012). Enhanced reward sensitivity and decreased loss sensitivity in internet addicts: an fMRI study during a guessing task. J. Psychiatr. Res. 46, 1527–1534. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2011.06.017

Dong, G., Shen, Y., Huang, J., and Du, X. (2013). Impaired error-monitoring function in people with internet addiction disorder: an event-related fMRI study. Eur. Addict. Res. 19, 269–275. doi: 10.1159/000346783

Duke, É., and Montag, C. (2017). Smartphone addiction, daily interruptions and self-reported productivity. Addict. Behav. Rep. 6, 90–95. doi: 10.1016/j.abrep.2017.07.002

Duolingo (2020). The Duolingo English Test: How we're using AI to bring English Proficiency Testing to the World. Duolingo Blog . Available online at: https://blog.duolingo.com/the-duolingo-english-test-ai-driven-language-assessment/ (accessed July 1, 2023).

Eppler, M. J., and Mengis, J. (2004). The concept of information overload: a review of literature from organization science, accounting, marketing, MIS, and related disciplines. Inf. Soc. 20, 325–344. doi: 10.1080/01972240490507974

Ferrucci, D., Levas, A., Bagchi, S., Gondek, D., and Mueller, E. (2010). Watson: beyond jeopardy! Artif. Intell . 199–200, 93–105. doi: 10.1016/j.artint.2012.06.009

Firth, J., Torous, J., Stubbs, B., Firth, J. A., Steiner, G. Z., Smith, L., et al. (2019). The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry 18, 119–129. doi: 10.1002/wps.20617

Fitzpatrick, K. K., Darcy, A., and Vierhile, M. (2017). Delivering cognitive behavior therapy to young adults with symptoms of depression and anxiety using a fully automated conversational agent (Woebot): a randomized controlled trial. JMIR Ment. Health 4, e19. doi: 10.2196/mental.7785

Fossati, P., Hezemans, F. H., van der Does, W., and Koot, H. M. (2018). Development and evaluation of the short digital media use questionnaire: a tool for the assessment of excessive and addictive digital media use. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 40, 68–78. doi: 10.1007/s10862-017-9625-1

Freeman, D., Reeve, S., Robinson, A., Ehlers, A., Clark, D., Spanlang, B., et al. (2018). Virtual reality in the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental health disorders. Psychol. Med. 47, 2393–2400. doi: 10.1017/S003329171700040X

Frein, S. T., Jones, S. L., and Gerow, J. E. (2013). When it comes to Facebook there may be more to bad memory than just multitasking. Comput. Hum. Behav . 29 2179–2182. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.04,031

Gentile, D. A., Swing, E. L., Lim, C. G., and Khoo, A. (2012). Video game playing, attention problems, and impulsiveness: evidence of bidirectional causality. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 1, 62–70. doi: 10.1037/a0026969

Graesser, A. C., Hu, X., and Sottilare, R. A. (2018). “Intelligent tutoring systems,” in International Handbook of the Learning Sciences , eds F. Fischer, C. E. Hmelo-Silver, S. R. Goldman, and P. Reimann (London: Routledge), 246–255. doi: 10.4324/9781315617572-24

Gunning, D., Stefik, M., Choi, J., Miller, T., Stumpf, S., and Yang, G. Z. (2019). XAI—explainable artificial intelligence. Sci. Robot. 4, eaay7120. doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aay7120

Hajli, N. (2014). A study of the impact of social media on consumers. Int. J. Market Res. 56, 387–404. doi: 10.2501/IJMR-2014-025

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., and Sarsa, H. (2014). “Does gamification work? - a literature review of empirical studies on gamification,” in Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Waikoloa, HI: IEEE). doi: 10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

Hattie, J., and Timperley, H. (2007). The power of Feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 77, 81–112. doi: 10.3102/003465430298487

He, Q., Turel, O., and Bechara, A. (2017).Brain anatomy alterations associated with Social Networking Site (SNS) addiction. Sci. Rep . 7, 45064. doi: 10.1038/srep45064

Henkel, L. A. (2014). Point-and-shoot memories: the influence of taking photos on memory for a museum tour. Psychol Sci . 25, 396–402. doi: 10.1177/0956797613504438

Hill, R. L., Ford, W. R., and Farreras, I. G. (2015). Real conversations with artificial intelligence: a comparison between human–human online conversations and human–chatbot conversations. Comput. Hum. Behav. 49, 245–250. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.026

Hobbs, R. (2010). Digital and Media Literacy: A Plan of Action. Washington, DC: Aspen Institute.

Hong, S.-B., Kim, J.-W., Choi, E.-J., Kim, H.-H., Suh, J.-E., Kim, C.-D., et al. (2013). Reduced orbitofrontal cortical thickness in male adolescents with internet addiction. Behav. Brain Funct. 9, 11. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-9-11

Hysing, M., Pallesen, S., Stormark, K. M., Jakobsen, R., Lundervold, A. J., and Sivertsen, B. (2015). Sleep and use of electronic devices in adolescence: results from a large population-based study. BMJ Open 5, e006748. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006748

Iaria, G., Palermo, L., Committeri, G., and Barton, J. J. (2009). Age differences in the formation and use of cognitive maps. Behav. Brain Res. 196, 187–191. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.08.040

Iqbal, S. T., and Horvitz, E. (2007). “Disruption and recovery of computing tasks: field study, analysis, and directions,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New YorK, NY: acm), 677–686. doi: 10.1145/1240624.1240730

Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of Groupthink: A Psychological Study of Foreign-Policy Decisions and Fiascoes. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Junco, R. (2012). Too much face and not enough books: the relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28, 187–198. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.026

Junco, R., and Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: the relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Comput. Educ. 59, 505–514. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.023

Kanai, R., Bahrami, B., Roylance, R., and Rees, G. (2012). Online social network size is reflected in human brain structure. Proc. Biol. Sci. 279, 1327–1334. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.1959

Kashdan, T. B., Rose, P., and Fincham, F. D. (2004). Curiosity and exploration: facilitating positive subjective experiences and personal growth opportunities. J. Pers. Assess. 82, 291–305. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8203_05

Kirschner, P. A., and Karpinski, A. C. (2010). Facebook ® and academic performance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 26, 1237–1245. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.024

Krasnova, H., Wenninger, H., Widjaja, T., and Buxmann, P. (2013). “Envy on facebook: a hidden threat to users' life satisfaction?” in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Wirtschaftsinformatik (WI2013) (Universität Leipzig). doi: 10.7892/boris.47080

Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., et al. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PLoS ONE 8, e69841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0069841

Kruger, J., Epley, N., Parker, J., and Ng, Z. (2005). Egocentrism over e-mail: can we communicate as well as we think? J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 89, 925–936. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.925

Kühn, S., and Gallinat, J. (2014). Amount of lifetime video gaming is positively associated with entorhinal, hippocampal and occipital volume. Mol. Psychiatry 19, 842–847. doi: 10.1038/mp.2013.100

Kuss, D. J., and Griffiths, M. D. (2012). Internet and gaming addiction: a systematic literature review of neuroimaging studies. Brain Sci. 2, 347–374. doi: 10.3390/brainsci2030347

Kuss, D. J., Griffiths, M. D., and Pontes, H. M. (2014). Chaos and confusion in DSM-5 diagnosis of internet gaming disorder: issues, concerns, and recommendations for clarity in the field. J. Behav. Addict. 3, 99–102. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.062

Kwak, K., Giovanello, K. S., Bozoki, A., Styner, M., Dayan, E., and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. (2021). Subtyping of mild cognitive impairment using a deep learning model based on brain atrophy patterns. Cell Rep. Med. 2, 100467. doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100467

Lee, H., Kim, J. W., and Choi, T. Y. (2017). Risk factors for smartphone addiction in Korean adolescents: smartphone use patterns. J. Korean Med. Sci. 33, e323. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2017.32.10.1674

Li, Y., Liu, J., and Ren, J. (2019). Social recommendation model based on user interaction in complex social networks. PLoS One. 14, e0218957. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218957

Lin, L. Y., Sidani, J. E., Shensa, A., Radovic, A., Miller, E., Colditz, J. B., et al. (2016). Association between social media use and depression among US young adults. Depress. Anxiety 33, 323–331. doi: 10.1002/da.22466

Lin, Y. H., Lin, Y. C., Lee, Y. H., Lin, P. H., Lin, S. H., Chang, L. R., et al. (2015). Time distortion associated with smartphone addiction: identifying smartphone addiction via a mobile application (App). J. Psychiatr. Res. 65, 139–145. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.003

Loh, K. K., and Kanai, R. (2014). Higher media multi-tasking activity is associated with smaller gray-matter density in the anterior cingulate cortex. PLoS ONE 9, e106698. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106698

Lui, K., and Wong, A. C. (2012). Does media multitasking always hurt? A positive correlation between multitasking and multisensory integration. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 19, 647–653. doi: 10.3758/s13423-012-0245-7

Machete, P., and Turpin, M. (2020). “The use of critical thinking to identify fake news: a systematic literature review,” in Responsible Design, Implementation and Use of Information and Communication Technology, Vol. 12067 , 235–246. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-45002-1_20

Manwell, L. A., Tadros, M., Ciccarelli, T. M., and Eikelboom, R. (2022). Digital dementia in the internet generation: excessive screen time during brain development will increase the risk of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias in adulthood. J. Integr. Neurosci. 21, 28. doi: 10.31083/j.jin2101028

Mark, G., Gudith, D., and Klocke, U. (2008). “The cost of interrupted work: more speed and stress,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (New York, NY: ACM), 107–110. doi: 10.1145/1357054.1357072

Mark, G., Iqbal, S., and Czerwinski, M. (2017). “How blocking distractions affects workplace focus and productivity,” in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2017 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (New York, NY: ACM), 928–934. doi: 10.1145/3123024.3124558

Meshi, D., Elizarova, A., Bender, A., and Verdejo-Garcia, A. (2019). Excessive social media users demonstrate impaired decision making in the iowa gambling task. J. Behav. Addict. 8, 321–332. doi: 10.1556/2006.7.2018.138

Montag, C., Markowetz, A., Blaszkiewicz, K., Andone, I., Lachmann, B., Sariyska, R., et al. (2017). Facebook usage on smartphones and gray matter volume of the nucleus accumbens. Behav. Brain Res. 329, 221–228. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2017.04.035

Musk, E., and Neuralink. (2020). An integrated brain-machine interface platform with thousands of channels. J. Med. Int. Res. 22, e16194. doi: 10.2196/16194

Nikkelen, S. W., Valkenburg, P. M., and Huizinga, M. (2014). Media use and ADHD-related behaviors in children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Dev. Psychol. 50, 2228–2241. doi: 10.1037/a0037318

Nikken, P., and Schols, M. (2015). How and why parents guide the media use of young children. J. Child Fam. Stud. 24, 3423–3435. doi: 10.1007/s10826-015-0144-4

Nussbaum, M., Barahona, C., Rodriguez, F., Guentulle, V., Lopez, F., Vazquez-Uscanga, E., et al. (2021). Taking critical thinking, creativity and grit online. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 69, 201–206. doi: 10.1007/s11423-020-09867-1

Oberauer, K. (2019). Working memory and attention - a conceptual analysis and review. J Cogn . 2, 36. doi: 10.5334/joc.58

Odgers, C. L., Jensen, M. R., and Choukas-Bradley, S. (2019). Annual research review: adolescent mental health in the digital age: facts, fears, and future directions. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 60, 254–273. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.13190

Ophir, E., Nass, C., and Wagner, A. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 106, 15583–15587. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0903620106

Oulasvirta, A., Rattenbury, T., Ma, L., and Raita, E. (2012). Habits make smartphone use more pervasive. Pers. Ubiquitous Comput. 16, 105–114. doi: 10.1007/s00779-011-0412-2

Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: What the Internet is Hiding from You . London: Penguin. doi: 10.3139/9783446431164

Paulus, M. P., Squeglia, L. M., Bagot, K., Jacobus, J., Kuplicki, R., Breslin, F. J., et al. (2019). Screen media activity and brain structure in youth: evidence for diverse structural correlation networks from the ABCD study. Neuroimage. 185, 140–153. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.10.040

Perloff, R. M. (2014). Social media effects on young women's body image concerns: theoretical perspectives and an agenda for research. Sex Roles 71, 363–377. doi: 10.1007/s11199-014-0384-6

Pontes, H. M., Taylor, M., and Stavropoulos, V. (2018). Beyond “Facebook Addiction”: the role of cognitive-related factors and psychiatric distress in social networking site addiction. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 21, 240–247. doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0609

Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Barrett, E. L., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J. B., et al. (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms of depression and anxiety: a nationally-representative study among U.S. young adults. Comput. Hum. Behav. 69, 1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.013

Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., and Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 1841–1848. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014

Puukko, K., Hietajärvi, L., Maksniemi, E., Alho, K., and Salmela-Aro, K. (2020). Social media use and depressive symptoms-A longitudinal study from early to late adolescence. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public. Health. 17, 5921. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17165921

Ra, C. K., Jun, J. Y., and Sari, B. A. (2020). Association between screen time and symptoms of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Pediatr. 174, 1–10. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2020.3725

Radesky, J. S., Schumacher, J., and Zuckerman, B. (2014). Mobile and interactive media use by young children: the good, the bad, and the unknown. Pediatrics 135, 1–3. doi: 10.1542/peds.2014-2251

Rosen, L. D., Carrier, L. M., and Cheever, N. A. (2013a). Facebook and texting made me do it: media-induced task-switching while studying. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 948–958. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.001

Rosen, L. D., Lim, A. F., Carrier, L. M., and Cheever, N. A. (2011). An empirical examination of the educational impact of text message-induced task switching in the classroom: educational implications and strategies to enhance learning. Psicol. Educ. 17, 163–177. doi: 10.5093/ed2011v17n2a4

Rosen, L. D., Whaling, K., Carrier, L. M., Cheever, N. A., and Rokkum, J. (2013b). The media and technology usage and attitudes scale: an empirical investigation. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 2501–2511. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.006

Rudin, C. (2019). Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 206–215. doi: 10.1038/s42256-019-0048-x

Settles, B., LaFlair, G. T., and Hagiwara, M. (2020). Machine learning–driven language assessment. Trans. Assoc. Comput. Linguist. 8, 247–263. doi: 10.1162/tacl_a_00310

Shute, V. J. (2008). Focus on formative feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 78, 153–189. doi: 10.3102/0034654307313795

Sibley, B. A., and Etnier, J. L. (2003). The relationship between physical activity and cognition in children: a meta-analysis. Pediatr. Exerc. Sci. 15, 243–256. doi: 10.1123/pes.15.3.243

Sibley, M. H., and Coxe, S. J. (2018). Digital media use and ADHD symptoms. JAMA . 320, 2599. doi: 10.1001/jama.2018.18095

Sparrow, B., Liu, J., and Wegner, D. M. (2011). Google effects on memory: cognitive consequences of having information at our fingertips. Science 333, 776–778. doi: 10.1126/science.1207745

Spitzer, M. (2012). Digital Dementia: What we and Our children are Doing to Our Minds. Gothenburg: Ecowin.

Stone, L. (2007). Continuous Partial Attention, Version 33 . Available online at: https://lindastone.net/2009/11/30/beyond-simple-multi-tasking-continuous-partial-attention/ (accessed July 1, 2023).

Sweller, J. (1994). Cognitive load theory, learning difficulty, and instructional design. Learn. Instr. 4, 295–312. doi: 10.1016/0959-4752(94)90003-5

Sweller, J. (2011). “Cognitive load theory,” in The Psychology of Learning and Motivation: Cognition in Education , eds J. P. Mestre, and B. H. Ross (Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press), 37–76. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-387691-1.00002-8

Tao, R., Huang, X., Wang, J., Zhang, H., Zhang, Y., and Li, M. (2010). Proposed diagnostic criteria for internet addiction. Addiction 105, 556–564. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02828.x

Thornton, B., Faires, A., Robbins, M., and Rollins, E. (2014). The mere presence of a cell phone may be distracting implications for attention and task performance. Soc. Psychol. 45 479–488. doi: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000216

Trougakos, J. P., Beal, D. J., Green, S. G., and Weiss, H. M. (2008). Making the break count: an episodic examination of recovery activities, emotional experiences, and positive affective displays. Acad. Manage. J. 51, 131–146. doi: 10.5465/amj.2008.30764063

Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together: Why We Expect More From Technology and Less From Each Other . New York, NY: Basic Books, 360. ISBN 978-0-465-01021-9.

Vaidyam, A. N., Wisniewski, H., Halamka, J. D., Kashavan, M. S., and Torous, J. B. (2019). Chatbots and conversational agents in mental health: a review of the psychiatric landscape. Can. J. Psychiatry 64, 456–464. doi: 10.1177/0706743719828977

Van Deursen, A., and Van Dijk, J. (2011). Internet skills performance tests: are people ready for eHealth? J. Med. Internet Res .13, e35. doi: 10.2196/jmir.1581

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Commun. Res. 23, 3–43. doi: 10.1177/009365096023001001

Ward, A. F., Duke, K., Gneezy, A., and Bos, M. W. (2017). Brain drain: the mere presence of one's own smartphone reduces available cognitive capacity. J. Assoc. Consum. Res. 2, 140–154. doi: 10.1086/691462

Wilmer, H. H., Sherman, L. E., and Chein, J. M. (2017). Smartphones and cognition: a review of research exploring the links between mobile technology habits and cognitive functioning. Front. Psychol. 8, 605. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00605

Young, K. S. (1998). Caught in the Net: How to Recognize the Signs of Internet Addiction—and a Winning Strategy for Recovery. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

Yuan, K., Qin, W., Wang, G., Zeng, F., Zhao, L., Yang, X., et al. (2011). Microstructure abnormalities in adolescents with internet addiction disorder. PLoS ONE 6, e20708. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020708

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., and Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators? Int. J. Educ. Technol. High Educ . 16, 39. doi: 10.1186/s41239-019-0171-0

Zhou, Y., Lin, F. C., Du, Y. S., Qin, L. D., Zhao, Z. M., Xu, J. R., et al. (2011). Gray matter abnormalities in Internet addiction: a voxel-based morphometry study. Eur. J. Radiol. 79, 92–95. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.10.025

Ziegler, D. A., Anguera, J. A., Gallen, C. L., Hsu, W.-Y., Wais, P. E., and Gazzaley, A. (2022). Leveraging technology to personalize cognitive enhancement methods in aging. Nat. Aging 2, 475–483. doi: 10.1038/s43587-022-00237-5

Keywords: cognitive function and development, digital technology, neuroscience, digital and social media, screen time, brain development, ChatGPT, artificial intelligence (AI)

Citation: Shanmugasundaram M and Tamilarasu A (2023) The impact of digital technology, social media, and artificial intelligence on cognitive functions: a review. Front. Cognit. 2:1203077. doi: 10.3389/fcogn.2023.1203077

Received: 10 April 2023; Accepted: 18 July 2023; Published: 24 November 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Shanmugasundaram and Tamilarasu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Mathura Shanmugasundaram, mathura@alumni.harvard.edu

† These authors have contributed equally to this work

This article is part of the Research Topic

The Impact of Digital World on Cognitive Development

Critical Thinking 2021: Social Media’s Impact on Mental Health

In our annual survey on the state of critical thinking, the Reboot Foundation asked people about their use of and views on social media, particularly as it related to their mental health. In the survey, our research team also asked questions about reasoning, media literacy, and critical thinking. Our goal was to take the temperature of popular opinion about social media and to gauge what, if anything, people think should be done to change their relationship with it.

Key Findings: How Social Media Impacts Mental Health

• As social media use rises due to the pandemic, people are increasingly concerned about its impact on mental health. Over 60 percent of respondents said their social media use had gone up since the onset of COVID-19 lockdowns, while around half of respondents said they spend more than two hours a day on social media.
• Despite the general acknowledgment that social media is contributing to symptoms of poor mental health, a significant percentage of people aren’t willing to stop scrolling or to put down their screens.
• When it comes to the impact of social media on political discourse, the public is ambivalent. While many found social media damaging to their political reasoning, others thought they benefited from being exposed to new ideas online.
• Support for critical thinking skills remains nearly universal, with equally strong support for the teaching of critical thinking at all levels of education.

Privacy Overview

Digital Literacy and Inclusion pp 99–112 Cite as

Students’ Use of Social Media and Critical Thinking: The Mediating Effect of Engagement

• Asad Abbas 2 , 3 ,
• Talia Gonzalez-Cacho 4 ,
• Danica Radovanović 5 ,
• Ahsan Ali 6 &
• Guillermina Benavides Rincón 3  
• First Online: 01 October 2023

202 Accesses

The aim of this book chapter is to empirically explore the mediating role of students’ social media engagement and their ability to think critically. To achieve the aim of the study, we designed a Google Form online survey with questions related to (1) the use of social media, (2) engagement, and (3) critical thinking by the deployment of digital literacy skills. We collected data using convenience sampling techniques. Sixty-seven undergraduate Architecture and Civil engineering students from Tecnologico de Monterrey, Puebla Campus of Mexico volunteered to participate in the study. After data collection, we applied a mediation test by using the “medmod” module of Jamovi software. Results from the data analysis support all proposed hypotheses and also affirm that engagement is partially mediated between the use of social media and the critical thinking skills of undergraduate Architecture and Civil engineering students. Therefore, this study confirms that the use of social media-based course activities is helpful for university students to engage with other peers by deploying digital literacy skills to analyze, share, and communicate relevant information and knowledge about specific topics within the relevant course structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Ahmad AR, Jameel AS, Raewf M (2021) Impact of social networking and technology on knowledge sharing among undergraduate students. Int Bus Educ J 14(1):1–16. https://doi.org/10.37134/ibej.vol14.1.1.2021

Article   Google Scholar  

Ahmadi DMR (2018) The use of technology in English language learning: a literature review. Int J Res English Educ 3(2):115–125. https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.3.2.115

Alghizzawi M, Habes M, Salloum SA, Ghani M, Mhamdi C, Shaalan K (2019) The effect of social media usage on students’ e-learning acceptance in higher education: a case study from The United Arab Emirates. Int J Inf Technol Lang Stud 3(3):13–26

Google Scholar  

Ali-Hassan H, Nevo D, Wade M (2015) Linking dimensions of social media use to job performance: the role of social capital. J Strateg Inf Syst 24(2):65–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2015.03.001

Al-Rahmi WM, Othman MS, Yusuf LM (2015) Effect of engagement and collaborative learning on satisfaction through the use of social media on Malaysian higher education. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol 9(12):1132–1142. https://doi.org/10.19026/rjaset.9.2608

Anthony S, Garner B (2016) Teaching soft skills to business students: an analysis of multiple pedagogical methods. Bus Prof Commun Q 79(3):360–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/2329490616642247

Armstrong A, Georgas H (2006) Using interactive technology to teach information literacy concepts to undergraduate students. Ref Serv Rev 34(4):491–497. https://doi.org/10.1108/00907320610716396

Axelson RD, Flick A (2010) Defining student engagement. Change Mag High Learn 43(1):38–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2011.533096

Balasooriya I, Mor E, Rodríguez ME (2018) Understanding user engagement in digital education. In: Learning and collaboration technologies. Learning and teaching. Springer, Cham, pp 3–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91152-6_1

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bedenlier S, Bond M, Buntins K, Zawacki-Richter O, Kerres M (2020) Facilitating student engagement through educational technology in higher education: a systematic review in the field of arts and humanities. Australas J Educ Technol 36(4):126–150. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5477

Bhardwaj P, Gupta P, Panwar H, Siddiqui MK, Morales-Menendez R, Bhaik A (2021) Application of deep learning on student engagement in e-learning environments. Comput Electr Eng 93:107277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compeleceng.2021.107277

Chan I, Lau Y-y, Lee WSW (2020) Adoption of knowledge creation model in team-based project to support student engagement. Int J Innov Creativity Chang 14(11):1–15

Chartrand J, Ishikawa J, Flander S (2013) Critical thinking means business: learn to apply and develop the new #1 workplace skill. TalentLens. https://us.talentlens.com/content/dam/school/global/TalentLens/us/whitepapers/critical-thinking-means-business.pdf

Clark M, Fine MB, Scheuer C-L (2017) Relationship quality in higher education marketing: the role of social media engagement. J Mark High Educ 27(1):40–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2016.1269036

Dabbagh N, Kitsantas A (2012) Personal learning environments, social media, and self-regulated learning: a natural formula for connecting formal and informal learning. Internet High Educ 15(1):3–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2011.06.002

Eastman JK, Iyer R, Eastman KL (2011) Business students’ perceptions, attitudes, and satisfaction with interactive technology: an exploratory study. J Educ Bus 86(1):36–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832321003774756

Eom SB, Wen HJ, Ashill N (2016) The determinants of students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction in university online education: an update*. Decis Sci J Innov Educ 14(2):185–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/dsji.12097

Erdogdu F (2022) ICT, learning environment and student characteristics as potential cross-country predictors of academic achievement. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10848-x

Fredricks JA, Blumenfeld PC, Paris AH (2004) School engagement: potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Rev Educ Res 74(1):59–109. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543074001059

Gonzalez-Cacho T, Abbas A (2022) Impact of interactivity and active collaborative learning on students’ critical thinking in higher education. IEEE Rev Iberoam Tecnol del Aprendiz 17(3):254–261. https://doi.org/10.1109/rita.2022.3191286

Haq IU, Anwar A, Rehman IU, Asif W, Sobnath D, Sherazi HHR, Nasralla MM (2021) Dynamic group formation with intelligent tutor collaborative learning: a novel approach for next generation collaboration. IEEE Access 9:143406–143422. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2021.3120557

Haroon Z, Azad AA, Sharif M, Aslam A, Arshad K, Rafiq S (2020) COVID-19 era: challenges and solutions in dental education. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak 30(10):S129–S131. https://doi.org/10.29271/jcpsp.2020.Supp1.S129

Ilin V (2021) The role of user preferences in engagement with online learning. E-Learn Digit Media:1–20. https://doi.org/10.1177/20427530211035514

Janssen EM, Mainhard T, Buisman RS, Verkoeijen PP, Heijltjes AE, van Peppen LM, van Gog T (2019) Training higher education teachers’ critical thinking and attitudes towards teaching it. Contemp Educ Psychol 58:310–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.03.007

Kaeophanuek S, Jaitip N-S, Nilsook P (2018) How to enhance digital literacy skills among information sciences students. Int J Inf Educ Technol 8(4):292–297. https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2018.8.4.1050

Kahu ER (2013) Framing student engagement in higher education. Stud High Educ 38(5):758–773. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.598505

Khlaif ZN, Sanmugam M, Ayyoub A (2022) Impact of technostress on continuance intentions to use mobile technology. Asia Pac Educ Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-021-00638-x

Khoo BK (2019) Mobile applications in higher education: implications for teaching and learning. Int J Inf Commun Technol Educ 15(1):83–96. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijicte.2019010106

Knowles M, Dixon D (2016) Guidance techniques to improve student engagement in critical reflection regarding the preparation of technical reports. Stud Engage Exp J 5(1). https://doi.org/10.7190/seej.v5.i1.104

Le B, Lawire GA, Wang JTH (2022) Student self-perception on digital literacy in STEM blended learning environments. J Sci Educ Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09956-1

Mafarja N, Zulnaidi H, Fadzil HM (2022) Using reciprocal teaching strategy to improve physics students’ critical thinking ability. Eurasia J Math Sci Technol Educ 18(1):em2069. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/11506

Malik MJ, Ahmad M, Kamran MR, Aliza K, Elahi MZ (2020) Student use of social media, academic performance, and creativity: the mediating role of intrinsic motivation. Interact Technol Smart Educ 17(4):403–415. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-01-2020-0005

Manu BD, Ying F, Oduro D, Boateng SA (2021) Student engagement and social media in tertiary education: the perception and experience from the Ghanaian public university. Soc Sci Humanit Open 3(1):100100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2020.100100

Mbodila M, Ndebele C, Muhandji K (2014) The effect of social media on student’s engagement and collaboration in higher education: a case study of the use of Facebook at a South African university. J Commun 5(2):115–125. https://doi.org/10.1080/0976691x.2014.11884831

Mehdinezhad V (2011) First year students’ engagement at the university. Int Online J Educ Sci 3(1):47–66

Membrillo-Hernández J, García-García R, Lara-Prieto V (2021) From the classroom to home: experiences on the sudden transformation of face-to-face bioengineering courses to a flexible digital model due to the 2020 health contingency. In: Educating engineers for future industrial revolutions. Springer, Cham, pp 488–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-68201-9_48

Mershad K, Said B (2022) DIAMOND: a tool for monitoring the participation of students in online lectures. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10801-y

Moon SJ, Bai SY (2020) Components of digital literacy as predictors of youth civic engagement and the role of social media news attention: the case of Korea. J Child Media 14(4):458–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/17482798.2020.1728700

Ouyang F, Dai X (2022) Using a three-layered social-cognitive network analysis framework for understanding online collaborative discussions. Australas J Educ Technol 38(1):164–181. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.7166

Pattanapichet F, Wichadee S (2015) Using space in social media to promote undergraduate students’ critical thinking skills. Turk Online J Dist Educ 16(4):38–49. https://doi.org/10.17718/tojde.94170

Pérez-Escolar M, Canet F (2022) Research on vulnerable people and digital inclusion: toward a consolidated taxonomical framework. Univ Access Inf Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-022-00867-x

Peters M, Romero M (2019) Lifelong learning ecologies in online higher education: students’ engagement in the continuum between formal and informal learning. Br J Educ Technol 50(4):1729–1743. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12803

Radovanović D, Hogan B, Lalić D (2015) Overcoming digital divides in higher education: digital literacy beyond Facebook. New Media Soc 17(10):1733–1749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444815588323

Radovanović D, Houngbonon GV, Le Quentrec E, Isabwe GMN, Noll J (2020) Digital infrastructure enabling platforms for health information and education in the global south. In: Digital inequalities in the global south. Springer, pp 199–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32706-4_10

Schmidt-Wilk J, Lovelace K (2017) Helping students succeed through engagement and soft skills development. Manag Teach Rev 2(1):4–6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2379298116687684

Shawky S, Kubacki K, Dietrich T, Weaven S (2019) Using social media to create engagement: a social marketing review. J Soc Mark 9(2):204–224. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSOCM-05-2018-0046

Shcheglova I, Koreshnikova Y, Parshina O (2019) The role of engagement in the development of critical thinking in undergraduates. Voprosy Obrazovaniya/Educ Stud Moscow 1:264–289

Sherman K (2013) How social media changes our thinking and learning. Lang Teach 37(4):8. https://doi.org/10.37546/jalttlt37.4-3

Sinatra GM, Heddy BC, Lombardi D (2015) The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science. Educ Psychol 50(1):1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2014.1002924

TEC (2022) Classes and experience for 90,000 students: challenge faced by Tec. https://conecta.tec.mx/en/news/national/education/classes-and-experiences-90000-students-challenge-faced-tec

Toplak ME, West RF, Stanovich KE (2017) Real-world correlates of performance on heuristics and biases tasks in a community sample. J Behav Decis Mak 30(2):541–554. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.1973

Uchidiuno J, Yarzebinski E, Keebler E, Koedinger K, Ogan A (2019) Learning from African classroom pedagogy to increase student engagement in education technologies. In: COMPASS ‘19: proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGCAS conference on computing and sustainable societies, Accra, Ghana, 2019. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, pp 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1145/3314344.3332501

Zhang Z, Ning M, Wu Z, Liu C, Li J (2022) Construction of a competition practice system for robotics engineering based on a competency model. Comput Appl Eng Educ. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22491

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Writing Lab, Institute for the Future of Education, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico

School of Government and Public Transformation, Tecnológico de Monterrey, San Pedro Garza García, Nuevo Leon, Mexico

Asad Abbas & Guillermina Benavides Rincón

School of Architecture, Art, and Design, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico

Talia Gonzalez-Cacho

Department of Technology Systems, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

Danica Radovanović

School of Economics and Management, Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Hangzhou, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Asad Abbas .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations, rights and permissions.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Abbas, A., Gonzalez-Cacho, T., Radovanović, D., Ali, A., Rincón, G.B. (2024). Students’ Use of Social Media and Critical Thinking: The Mediating Effect of Engagement. In: Radovanović, D. (eds) Digital Literacy and Inclusion. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30808-6_7

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-30808-6_7

Published : 01 October 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-30807-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-30808-6

eBook Packages : Engineering Engineering (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Original Language Spotlight
• Alternative and Non-formal Education 
• Cognition, Emotion, and Learning
• Curriculum and Pedagogy
• Education and Society
• Education, Change, and Development
• Education, Cultures, and Ethnicities
• Education, Gender, and Sexualities
• Education, Health, and Social Services
• Educational Administration and Leadership
• Educational History
• Educational Politics and Policy
• Educational Purposes and Ideals
• Educational Systems
• Educational Theories and Philosophies
• Globalization, Economics, and Education
• Languages and Literacies
• Professional Learning and Development
• Research and Assessment Methods
• Technology and Education
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Critical media literacy in teacher education, theory, and practice.

• Jeff Share , Jeff Share University of California Los Angeles
• Tatevik Mamikonyan Tatevik Mamikonyan School of Education, University of California Los Angeles
•  and  Eduardo Lopez Eduardo Lopez University of California Los Angeles
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1404
• Published online: 30 September 2019
• This version: 20 September 2023
• Previous version

Democracy in the digital networked age of “fake news” and “alternative facts” requires new literacy skills and critical awareness to read, write, and use media and technology to empower civic participation and social transformation. Unfortunately, not many educators have been prepared to teach students how to think critically with and about the media and technology that engulf us. Across the globe there is a growing movement to develop media and information literacy curriculum (UNESCO) and train teachers in media education (e-Media Education Lab), but these attempts are limited and in danger of co-optation by the faster growing, better financed, and less critical education and information technology corporations. It is essential to develop a critical response to the new information communication technologies, artificial intelligence, and algorithms that are embedded in all aspects of society. The possibilities and limitations are vast for teaching educators to enter K-12 classrooms and teach their students to use various media, critically question all types of texts, challenge problematic representations, and create alternative messages. Through applying a critical media literacy framework that has evolved from cultural studies and critical pedagogy, students at all grade levels can learn to critically analyze the messages and create their own alternative media. The voices of teachers engaging in this work can provide pragmatic insight into the potential and challenges of putting the theory into practice in K-12 public schools.

• critical literacy
• critical pedagogy
• media education
• media literacy
• critical media literacy
• social justice
• politics of representation
• cultural studies
• teacher education

Updated in this version

The authors made minor revisions to this text to reflect more recent scholarship. The reference list and further readings have similarly been updated.

Introduction

It is a formidable challenge to prepare critical educators to work inside a system in which every brick in the wall has been laid to transmit the information, skills, and ideas necessary to reproduce the social norms, inequities, ideologies, and alienation that are undermining the quality and sustainability of life on this planet. However, education can be a powerful tool to challenge these problems and create opportunities for students to work in solidarity with others to create a more socially and environmentally just world. To support these changes, we need teachers ready to engage students in critical inquiry by posing questions about systemic and structural issues of power, hierarchies of oppression, and social injustice. In the current media and information age, information communication technologies (ICTs) are available to either continue the control and degradation or to deconstruct the systems of oppression and reconstruct a more just and sustainable society.

Digital technology is opening opportunities for individual participation and alternative points of view, while at the same time a handful of enormous media and technology corporations have become the dominant storytellers, often repeating the same story at the expense of countless different perspectives and creative ways of thinking. Many of these storytellers are actually story-sellers, more interested in peddling ideas and products than informing, enlightening, inspiring, or challenging. While young people are using more media, they are also being used more by media companies. Giant transnational corporations are targeting youth as one of the most valuable markets for building brand loyalty and selling to advertisers. Researchers found 8- to 18-year-olds in the United States spend well over 10 hours a day interacting with various forms of media, such as music, computers, video games, television, film, and print ( Rideout et al., 2011 ). Another investigation discovered that 95% of American 13- to 17-year-olds have access to a smartphone and 97% say they are online daily and 46% use it constantly ( Vogels et al., 2022 ).

Not only is the amount of time with media increasing but the quality of that engagement is also changing by becoming more commercial and rarely critical. Researchers at Stanford University administered six tasks to 3,466 high schools across 14 states in the US to judge their ability to assess online information. In one task, students were asked to evaluate the credibility of a website that claimed to “disseminate factual reports” and 96% failed to learn about the site’s ties to the fossil fuel industry. In a different task, over half of students believed an anonymously posted video purporting to show voter fraud in the US was real, even though it was filmed in Russia ( Breakstone et al., 2021 ). In another study, Vosoughi et al. (2018) examined approximately 126,000 stories tweeted over 4.5 million times between 2006 and 2017 . The researchers were interested in understanding what accounted for the differential diffusion of verified true and false news stories. They found that false news stories spread “farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth because humans, not robots, are more likely to spread it” (p. 5). In analyzing the tweets, the authors concluded, false stories were 70% more likely to be retweeted because people found them not only more novel but the stories also inspired emotional responses of fear, disgust, or surprise.

The concern about “fake news” has encouraged many people to recognize the need for critical readers and writers of media. Some have suggested that we simply need better cognitive skills to determine truth from lies. However, making sense of the media and our information society is far more complicated than a reductionist idea of simply finding the truth. Rather than judging information as either true or false, students need to learn to search for multiple sources, different perspectives, and various types of evidence to triangulate and evaluate findings. In order to best evaluate and understand the information, they also need to question the influence of media in shaping the message and positioning the audience. Since all knowledge is an interpretation ( Kincheloe, 2007 ), interpreting the meaning of a message is a complex process that requires skills to probe empirical evidence, evaluate subjective biases, analyze the medium and construction of the text, and explore the social contexts.

This is an opportunity for educators to guide their students to think critically with and about the ICTs and media that surround them. Morrell et al. (2013) argue that the technology itself will not bring about transformative educational change. “That change will only come through teachers who draw on critical frameworks to create learning communities where the use of these tools becomes an empowering enterprise” (p. 14). Therefore, the changes in media, technology, and society require critical media literacy (CML) that can support teachers and students to question and create with and about the very tools that can empower or oppress, entertain or distract, inform or mislead, and buy or sell everything from lifestyles to politicians. Now more than ever, teachers should encourage students to be reading, viewing, listening to, interacting with, and creating a multitude of texts, from digital podcasts to multimedia productions.

Teacher Education

Even though youth are immersed in a world in which media and technology have entered all aspects of their lives and society, few teacher education programs are preparing teachers to help their students to critically understand the potential and limitations of these changes. It is crucial that new teachers learn how to teach their K-12 students to critically read and write everything, from academic texts to social media.

This means that schools of education responsible for training the new wave of teachers must be up to date, not just with the latest technology, but more importantly, with critical media literacy (CML) theory and pedagogy in order to prepare teachers and students to think and act critically with and about media and technology. In Canada, where media literacy is mandatory in every grade from 1 to 12, most new teachers are not receiving media literacy training in their preservice programs ( Wilson & Duncan, 2009 ). Researchers investigating media education in the United Kingdom and the US have found that many teachers are unprepared to teach media education and that professional learning opportunities are limited ( Butler, 2020 ; Kirwan et al., 2003 ). The progress has been slow, especially considering that inclusion of media literacy in formal public education has a history dating back to the 1980s in Australia, Britain, and Canada. However, nonformal media education has been occurring in many parts of the world for decades ( Hart, 1998 ; Kaplún, 1998 ; Kubey, 1997 ; Pegurer Caprino & Martínez-Cerdá, 2016 ; Prinsloo & Criticos, 1991 ).

While it is difficult to know for sure who is and who is not teaching critically about media and technology ( Mihailidis, 2008 ), there seems to be an increased interest in media literacy in the United States. In 2022 , the National Council of Teachers of English published a position statement recommending implementation of media education in English Language Arts along with two special issue journal publications ( Lynch, 2021 ; Kist & Christel, 2022 ) devoted to critical media literacy, arguing that “media education must be an essential component of the professional identity of teachers” ( National Council of Teachers of English, 2022 ).

As technology and media continue to evolve and increasingly enter public and private spaces, more educators are recognizing the need for training new teachers about media literacy ( Domine, 2011 ; Goetze et al., 2005 ; Hobbs, 2007a ) and some are even addressing the need to teach about CML ( Flores-Koulish et al., 2011 ; Funk et al., 2016 ; Robertson & Hughes, 2011 ; Trust et al., 2022 ). Researchers Tiede et al. (2015) studied 64 universities or colleges of teacher education in Germany and 316 U.S. public educational institutions that provide teacher training and graduate studies, concluding that very few offer more than media didactics (basic educational technology that teaches with media, not about media). From their data in the United States, they report, “media education, with emphasis on the instructional practices associated with the critical evaluation of media, culture, and society, were scarce, representing only 2% of all study programs in teacher training programs” (pp. 540−541). In Germany, the percentage increases to 25%, but “media didactics tends to be emphasized to the disadvantage of media education in both countries” (p. 542).

In 2011 , the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) published a curriculum guide online in 11 languages for training teachers in media education ( Grizzle & Wilson, 2011 ), declaring that “teacher training in media and information literacy will be a major challenge for the global education system at least for the next decade” ( Pérez-Tornero & Tayie, 2012 , p. 11). 1 In Europe, Ranieri and Bruni (2018) analyzed the successes and challenges of training preservice and in-service teachers about media and digital literacy. An initiative called e-Media Educational Lab, funded by the European Commission, provided blended training to 279 preservice teachers and 81 in-service teachers in six countries. Based on surveys and fieldnotes, Ranieri and Bruni (2018) reported that the preservice and in-service teachers found critical media analysis and media production to be very important; they described their intent to transfer their media competency to their classrooms and expressed a desire to learn more practical ways to help their students develop media competencies.

UNESCO’s approach to media education combines media and information literacy (MIL) to include many competencies, from learning about and using information communication technologies to thinking critically about ethics and democracy. Carolyn Wilson (2012) explains, “MIL is both a content area and way of teaching and learning; it is not only about the acquisition of technical skills, but the development of a critical framework and approaches” (p. 16).

Combining information technology with media-cultural studies is essential, but still infrequent. Within the current wave of educational reform that prioritizes the newest technology and career readiness over civic engagement and critical inquiry, schools are more likely to adopt only information technology or information literacy and not critical media education. In the United States, few universities offer more than a single course in media literacy and most do not even offer that ( Goetze et al., 2005 ; Meehan et al., 2015 ).

Schwarz (2001) asserts that because of the power of emerging literacies, “teacher education needs media literacy as an essential tool and an essential topic in the new millennium” (pp. 111−112). She calls for integrating media literacy across all subject areas of teacher education, “from methods courses and educational psychology to foundational courses and student teaching” (p. 118). This interdisciplinary approach for media education could be easier now for K-12 teachers in the United States since the Common Core State Standards require literacy to be taught and technology to be used across the curriculum ( California Common Core State Standards, 2013 ; Moore & Bonilla, 2014 ; Trust et al., 2022 ).

Two studies with a total of 31 preservice teachers found a discrepancy between their positive attitudes for teaching media literacy and the lack of attention and support in their teacher education programs to prepare them to teach MIL ( Gretter & Yadav, 2018 ). Based on interviews with these preservice teachers, Gretter and Yadav (2018) report that they associated MIL with critical thinking skills and expressed concerns about not knowing how to teach MIL because their teacher preparation program encouraged “teaching with technology and not necessarily about technology” (p. 115). These preservice teachers complained about “a lack of preparation to help them transfer their knowledge of digital media to MIL pedagogies that would benefit students” (p. 111). This highlights the importance of preparing educators with the theory and conceptual understandings as well as the pedagogy and practical applications for how to teach their students to critically analyze and create media.

Teaching Teachers Critical Media Literacy

Transforming education to critically use media, technology, and popular culture for social and environmental justice is the overarching goal of a critical media literacy (CML) course in the teacher education program at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). The authors of this article have been involved in designing and teaching this course to in-service and preservice teachers. Through combining theory from cultural studies and critical pedagogy with practical classroom applications of digital media and technology, this course prepares K-12 educators to teach their students how to critically analyze and create all types of media. In 2011 , this four-unit course on CML was officially approved and became a required class for all students working on their teaching credential at UCLA.

The teacher education program at UCLA is primarily a two-year master’s and credential program that accepts about 130 candidates annually. The program is committed to developing social justice educators to work with and improve the schooling conditions of California’s ethnically, culturally, and linguistically diverse children. While most of the students go through the two-year program, additional pathways for earning a teaching credential and master’s degree have been offered, such as a master’s-only program for in-service teachers with two years or more of full-time teaching experience.

The CML class is taught in separate sections, usually divided by subjects, with 25−50 students per section. Most of the candidates taking the class are student teaching at the same time, except for the master’s-only candidates, who were teaching full-time while attending the class once a week in the evening. The class includes lectures, discussions, and activities interwoven into each session during the 10-week quarter.

Beginning with a theoretical overview, the course explores the development of media education that is defined less as a specific body of knowledge or set of skills and more as a framework of conceptual understandings ( Buckingham, 2003 ). Much of the theory behind CML has evolved from cultural studies, a field of critical inquiry that began in the 20th century in Europe and continues to grow with new critiques of media and society. From the 1930s through the 1960s, researchers at the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research used critical social theory to analyze how media culture and the new tools of communication technology induce ideology and social control. In the 1960s, researchers at the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies at the University of Birmingham added to the earlier concerns of ideology with a more sophisticated understanding of the audience as active constructors of reality, not simply mirrors of an external reality. Kellner (1995) explains that cultural studies has continued to grow and incorporate concepts of semiotics, feminism, multiculturalism, and postmodernism. Incorporating a dialectical understanding of political economy, textual analysis, and audience theory, cultural studies critiques media culture as dynamic discourses that reproduce dominant ideologies as well as entertain, educate, and offer the possibilities for counter-hegemonic alternatives ( Hammer & Kellner, 2009 ).

Critical media literacy includes three dimensions ( Share & Gambino, 2022 ). The first involves the content students learn about systems, structures, and ideologies that reproduce hierarchies of power and knowledge concerning race, gender, class, sexuality and other forms of identity and environmental justice, as well as general understandings about how media and communication function. The second dimension engages the skills to critically think and question media representations and biases, to deconstruct and reconstruct media texts, and use a variety of media to access, analyze, evaluate, and create. The third involves developing a disposition for empathy, critical consciousness, and empowerment to take action to challenge and transform society to be more socially and environmentally just. This third dimension is based on Freire’s (2010) notion of conscientização , a revolutionary critical consciousness that involves perception as well as action against oppression. These three dimensions of critical media literacy pedagogy are supported through an inquiry-based democratic approach that follows ideas of transformative educators like John Dewey and Paulo Freire. We incorporate feminist theory and critical pedagogy to analyze relationships between media and audiences, information and power ( Carlson et al., 2013 ; Garcia et al., 2013 ). When we first began teaching the course, we used a simple framework with five core concepts and key questions from the Center for Media Literacy. 2 To emphasize the critical potential of these ideas, while providing an accessible tool for teachers to use in the classroom, the following critical media literacy framework was developed, with six conceptual understandings and questions, as shown in Table 1 ( Kellner & Share, 2019 ).

These six conceptual understandings and questions are referred to regularly and are addressed in all lesson plans. It is important for teachers to understand the concepts and questions because theory should inform practice for all three dimensions. However, it is better for K-12 students to learn to ask the questions rather than memorize the concepts, since the questions, with appropriate guidance, can lead students on a path of inquiry where they are more likely to make meaning themselves, related to the conceptual understandings.

The CML framework is designed to help teachers and their students question the role of power and ideology that socialize and control society through making some people and ideas seem “normal” and “natural” while the rest are “othered” and “marginalized” ( Hall, 2003 ). This critical framing supports teachers and students to deepen their explorations of racism, sexism, classism, homophobia, overconsumption, environmental exploitation, and other problematic representations in media. Candidates analyze and discuss current media examples, while also learning how to use various ICTs to create their own media with alternative counter-hegemonic representations. Using an inquiry process and democratic pedagogy, problems are posed to the students to collaboratively wrestle with, unpack, and respond to through media production.

Critical media literacy promotes an expansion of our understanding of literacy to include many types of texts, such as images, sounds, music, video games, social media, advertising, popular culture, and print, as well as a deepening of critical analysis to explore the connections between information and power. In our digital networked media age, it is not enough to teach students how to read and write just with print while their world has moved far beyond letters on a page. Literacy education in the 21st century requires breaking from traditional practices to include all the varied ways people communicate with media, technology, and any tool that facilitates the transfer of information or connects people. This calls for new skills and understandings to decode and analyze as well as to create and produce all types of texts. The California Teaching Performance Expectations also require teacher education programs to expand this view of literacy and integrate media and technology into coursework in order to “deepen teaching and learning to provide students with opportunities to participate in a digital society and economy” ( California Commission on Teacher Credentialing, 2016 , p. 9).

Each class starts by reviewing and applying the conceptual understandings and questions. Since one goal of the course is for candidates to understand that literacy includes reading and writing all types of texts, we encourage students to analyze as well as produce media. A series of assignments requires candidates to work together to create various types of media projects such as visual posters, photographs, podcasts, memes, digital stories, and social media. The candidates are also expected to work collaboratively on a CML lesson plan and learning segment that they write up, present a summary of to the whole class, and when possible, also teach it. For a detailed description of this course, see Share (2015) and visit the UCLA Library Critical Media Literacy Research Guide for links to articles, videos, and websites used in the course. 3

Table 1. Critical Media Literacy Framework

From a desire to explore if and how former students are applying the skills and knowledge gained from the critical media literacy (CML) course into their teaching practice, we created an online survey for students who had taken the course. Through purposeful sampling, we sent out the survey to the 738 students who had taken the CML course and ended up with 185 usable responses (25% response rate), 153 preservice and 32 in-service teachers. Of the 185 respondents, 53 taught elementary school and 132 were secondary-level teachers. The breakdown of the middle school and high school teachers was: 38 science, 34 math, 33 social sciences, 28 English, and several reported teaching a combination of subjects as well as some who taught other areas such as music, visual arts, Spanish, English language development, or adult education. The span of experience was wide; some just started teaching and some had been teaching over seven years, yet most of the teachers (52%) had been teaching between two and three years.

The mixed method survey included 20 questions. The first eight sought to identify participants’ teaching background. The remaining 12 questions inquired about their experiences teaching CML skills and concepts to their K-12 students. Ten quantitative questions used a Likert scale with a choice of responses, including very frequently, frequently, occasionally, rarely, and never, as well as an option to choose not applicable. The final two qualitative questions were open-ended in which respondents could type their thoughts about any “memorable moment(s) teaching critical media literacy” and “any additional comments.” During the analysis phase, we found it helpful to combine the categories very frequently and frequently and refer to them as VF/F.

Voices From the Field

Using mixed methods of quantitative and qualitative data, we analyzed the survey responses to explore teachers’ ideas about what they had been doing with their students. The overall feedback suggested that the majority of the respondents had brought aspects of media literacy education into their K-12 classrooms, and sometimes even incorporated CML. One of the most recurring patterns we noticed was that these teachers had been expanding the traditional concept of literacy by engaging their students with various types of media.

Teaching With Media

In reply to the first question, most of the respondents reported having integrated media into their class activities: 64% VF/F, 30% occasionally, 6% rarely, and no one responded never ( N = 185). The responses to Question 1 were very similar for elementary and secondary teachers, with only a 1% to 5% difference. Where we saw greater variation was when comparing the subject matter of secondary teachers. The English and science teachers had the highest percentages (75% and 76%) of VF/F responses to Question 1 about integrating media into class activities. Math teachers, by contrast, reported the lowest percentage, with 44% reporting VF/F and 15% rarely integrating media into the curriculum (see Figure 1 ).

Figure 1. Responses from secondary teachers to Question 1 about how often they integrated media into class activities.

While these responses demonstrated an overall high amount of media integration, it was not clear how the teachers integrated media and what students were doing with the media. The responses from Question 5 (“my students have created the following media”) provided more information about the students’ interactions with media, showing that the vast majority of respondents (92%) had their students create some type of media (see Figure 2 for a list of the various media students created).

Since the question only asked teachers to check the box for the type of media their students created, we did not know how often this occurred or with what degree of analysis. Questions 1 and 5 indicated that teaching with media occurred with over 90% of the respondents.

Figure 2. Responses to Question 5 about the different types of media that all 185 respondents report their students have created. They were asked to choose all that apply.

Teaching About Media

The second question tried to find out more about those interactions with media by asking respondents to rate how often they had given their “students opportunities to engage in media analysis.” For Question 2, about one-third of all 185 respondents, 32%, reported VF/F, 43% occasionally, 21% rarely, and 4% never. When comparing responses from Questions 1 and 2, the respondents seemed to have been doing more teaching with media (Question 1) than teaching about media (Question 2) (see Figure 3 ). A similar finding was mentioned in the research conducted in Germany and the United States by Tiede et al. (2015) .

Figure 3. Comparing all responses from Question 1 about integrating media into class activities (teaching with media) with Question 2 about engaging in media analysis (teaching about media).

A more nuanced perspective of Question 2 is possible when comparing the responses about media analysis from different content area secondary teachers. In response to Question 2, the teachers who reported VF/F were the following: 63% of English teachers reported giving the most opportunities for their students to engage in media analysis, as compared to almost half as often by 32% of science teachers and about five times less often by 12% of math teachers (see Figure 4 ). Since literacy is a primary goal of English instruction, it is not surprising that English teachers reported the highest levels of media analysis ( Hobbs, 2007b ).

It is important to recognize that teaching about media can be a highly complex and multifaceted undertaking, especially when done through a CML lens. For example, the second conceptual understanding encourages students to analyze the codes and conventions of the media text and the medium through which they travel by asking how the text was constructed and delivered or accessed. This, in itself, can have many layers and yet is just one of six questions intended to help students think critically about media. Livingstone (2018) asserts, “media literacy is needed not only to engage with the media but to engage with society through the media .” As Luke and Freebody (1997) argue, it is not enough to only have a psychological approach to literacy, as if reading and writing is just an individual cognitive process. We need to also bring a sociological lens into the process of questioning the contexts, the dominant ideologies, and the systems that make some things seem “natural” or “normal.” The CML framework is a holistic tool for thinking about and questioning the dynamic role media play in our relationships with ourselves, each other, and society. Responses and comments to other questions in the survey provide more insight into how some teachers have engaged their students in various types of media analysis.

Figure 4. Comparing responses from different content areas about Question 2 regarding how often secondary teachers gave their students opportunities to engage in media analysis.

Evaluating Information and Advertising

In the qualitative responses to Questions 11 and 12, teachers mentioned embracing basic media literacy principles in the ways students were evaluating the credibility of information and advertising as well as creating different types of media. The popularity of the term “fake news” and the growing amount of disinformation have increased the challenge to distinguish misinformation and propaganda from journalism and scientifically researched facts ( Rogow, 2018 ). An elementary teacher who reported “frequently” integrating media into the classroom, asserted:

Though my students are younger and some of these concepts are more difficult to teach than others, I find it important to bring up especially in terms of making sure they don’t believe every YouYube video they watch. We’ve had many meaningful discussions about what can be created for a video shouldn’t just be accepted as the truth. For example, the ‘mermaid’ documentary that came out a few years ago had all of my students convinced that they had found a mermaid. It led to an interesting discussion on hoaxes and further reading about Bigfoo[t] and other such stories.

Since all media contain bias because they are created by subjective humans, it is important for teachers to help their students to recognize the bias and also be able to judge the credibility of information. A high school math teacher wrote:

It has not happened until this school year, when I began teaching Statistics. I introduced some pictographs for students to analyze and an article for students to read about how a website stated that if polls were unskewed, Trump would be leading the polls for election. I had students read and discuss about the validity and why/why not it is trustable.

Several respondents mentioned having their students study political advertising, and since all U.S. elections are now multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns (e.g., Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign won the top prizes at the Cannes Lions International Advertising Awards), there is little distinction between selling products, ideas, and political candidates.

Analyzing advertising is an important aspect of media education because advertising is the motor that drives commercial media and has become so common in our lives that there are few spaces that are completely ad-free ( Jhally, 2003 ). Several respondents reported about their students investigating advertisements for false health messages, misleading packaging, political campaigns, tobacco, alcohol, and different perspectives. One secondary English teacher wrote, “My students took pictures of advertisements that surrounded their neighborhood and we analyzed them for patterns, themes, and purposes.” A high school science teacher reported, “I had many times this past year where students were able to reflect on marketing strategies and how they affect the viewer’s perspective of their life and themselves. Students made great connections.”

During the critical media literacy (CML) class, students scrutinize consumer culture and the role advertising plays in creating anxieties, shaping desires, and normalizing representations about all things, from consumption to gender, race, and class. Candidates in the CML class learn about these ideas through readings, by analyzing advertisements, and also by creating ads for different target audiences. When asked about the media their students had created, one third reported their students created advertisements.

Creating Different Types of Media

When students are taught print literacy, they are instructed how to decode letters on a page and how to write with those letters to construct words, sentences, and paragraphs. The same process of teaching reading and writing should be applied to visual images, movies, songs, video games, social media, and all the various multimedia texts that students are encountering daily. In responses from the survey, teachers reported about having their students write and create many different types of texts beyond print (see Figure 2 ).

One English teacher wrote that having students create media was “very successful. They loved being able to create memes, posters, Prezis, etc. to present their work.” An elementary teacher shared about students “creating podcasts/npr style news stories regarding UN sustainability goals.” Several respondents commented on their students designing commercials or challenging ads by producing spoofs that parody the ads. One middle school teacher shared, “students analyzed ads for nicotine and alcohol products, then used the practice with critical media skills to create ‘anti-ads’ with Google drawings.”

During the first year of teaching, a high school science teacher reported about a memorable moment when “creating a multi-lingual, easy-to-understand and scientifically supported pamphlet on the hazards in LA’s environment.” A high school Spanish teacher wrote about his students creating critical memes in Spanish, like the ones they created in the critical media literacy (CML) class. During the session exploring racism and media, candidates challenge racist representations through creating racial myth-busting memes. As a strategy to demonstrate the value of media production, the CML class has students create various media in almost every session, and these activities are often the favorite lessons mentioned in the end of course evaluations.

Increasing Engagement

While engagement is not a learning objective, all teaching benefits from students being engaged in their learning. One of the patterns that emerged from the responses was teachers’ observations that student engagement increased. An eighth-grade English teacher wrote that after incorporating media literacy, the students’ “entire attitude toward learning shifted. Especially the hard to reach students.” An elementary teacher reported, “Media literacy has made great contributions in my class with science research in the past. The simple act of using google images, google maps and finding credible sources has sparked learning and interest in my class.” Another elementary teacher shared about using critical media literacy (CML) to analyze food justice issues: “They were instantly engaged and students who had a difficult time writing and with critical thinking then did not.”

A secondary science teacher reported, “Students spent the entire class engaged in discussion when I intended for it to only be an introduction to the unit.” Another high school science teacher wrote, “When I did teach a class specifically geared towards media literacy, it was great because students were engaged. They were quick at analyzing images and creating their own.” A third science teacher wrote, “using critical media literacy made engaging my students in abstract chemistry concepts more meaningful and engaging.” Engagement tends to increase when students are genuinely interested and intrinsically motivated, something that often comes out of personal connection, a sense of meaningfulness, and an authentic belief in the value of the learning ( Dewey, 1963 ). These are all elements of good CML pedagogy. A high school science teacher described the feelings of students and their parents as they responded to their CML work: “My favorite moments are students exuding pride and passion over the work they are creating that speaks to their perspectives and experiences; parents proud of their students’ media creations.” Feelings of pride and passion are important for all students to experience; they help lower students’ affective filters for learning ( Krashen, 1995 ) and increase intrinsic motivation to want to learn.

Critical Media Literacy

As we analyzed teachers’ written responses, we saw a number of comments in which they were taking basic media literacy concepts to deeper levels of criticality. Several mentioned how useful the class was to understanding critical theory and be able to see how it can be enacted in their K-12 classroom. Similar findings were mentioned after Joanou (2017) analyzed data about a critical media literacy (CML) class taught to master’s-level practicing K-12 educators. Joanou (2017) reported, “critical media literacy helps bridge the gap between theory and practice” (p. 40). The use of media texts and popular culture can provide relevant examples for entry into abstract concepts that are often politically and emotionally charged, and sometimes too sensitive or too distant to begin discussing on a personal level.

Teaching about the connections between information and power reflects a key goal of CML ( Kellner & Share, 2007 ) and our respondents demonstrated this through their qualitative comments about recreating counter-narratives, analyzing the politics of representation, making critical connections between history and current events with media texts, and engaging in political, social, and environmental media activism. Questions 3 and 4 attempted to assess the frequency in which teachers were bringing critical aspects of media education to their students.

Question 3 asks teachers to rate how often: “My students have engaged in media analysis by exploring media representations of ideology, race, class, gender, sexuality, environmentalism, and/or other social justice issues.” Elementary and secondary teachers reported almost identical frequencies in response to Question 3: 22% in both groups reported VF/F while 42% (elementary) and 45% (secondary) stated occasionally. When asked Question 4 about making connections between information and power, the differences increased: 39% of the secondary teachers responded doing this VF/F while just 23% of the elementary teachers reported doing this VF/F.

In-service teachers reported higher frequencies for Question 3: 54% of in-service teachers reported VF/F while preservice teachers reported 14% VF/F. For Question 4: 56% of in-service teachers reported VF/F compared with 30% of preservice teachers who reported VF/F.

When comparing responses separated by subject matter with secondary teachers, 33% of English teachers and 30% of social science teachers reported VF/F for engaging in critical media analysis, as seen in Question 3 about exploring media representations. This is considerably higher than the 16% of science teachers and 9% of math teachers reporting VF/F. The math and science teachers reported the highest percentages for rarely or never having their students explore media representations of social justice issues (see Figure 5 ). The literature supports similar findings. Garii and Rule (2009) reported that student teachers had a difficult time integrating social justice into math and science content due to several factors. In their research with novice elementary teachers, Garii and Rule discovered that the candidates were not confident in their ability to teach math and science and had limited and unsophisticated knowledge of the content. They also viewed math and science “to be a set of routinized, algorithmic practices that lead to a single, correct answer and neither science nor mathematics are assumed to be closely connected to real-world issues and concerns” (p. 491). Given that they are struggling to learn and understand the content, math and science candidates turned to classroom textbooks to guide instructional practices. Incorporating nontraditional practices or making connections to students’ lives becomes a challenge because they disconnect social justice from their teaching and focus on teaching to the content ( Garii & Rule, 2009 ).

Figure 5. Responses to Question 3 from secondary teachers about how often they engaged their students in critical “media analysis by exploring media representations of ideology, race, class, gender, sexuality, environmentalism, and/or other social justice issues.”

One of the more significant findings of the study is the number of respondents reporting they “noticed that using critical media literacy encourages critical thinking among students” (Question 9). Of the preservice respondents, 61% reported VF/F, and for the in-service teachers, the percentages jump to 81% who reported VF/F. In both cases, the majority of respondents expressed their feelings that CML promotes critical thinking most of the time (see Figure 6 ). A middle school social science teacher wrote that after teaching CML, “students were deeper thinkers and our discussions were so much richer. Students were highly engaged and more invested in the classroom.” When comparing grade levels for Question 9, we see 78% of elementary teachers reported that using CML VF/F encourages critical thinking, and 61% of secondary teachers reported VF/F. This large percentage of elementary teachers reporting about CML encouraging critical thinking shows great promise for the potential of CML in the early grades.

Figure 6. Comparison of preservice and in-service teachers’ responses to Question 9 about how often they have noticed CML encourages critical thinking among their students.

Creating Counter Narratives and Supporting Students’ Voices

Many of the responses regarding transformative education centered on guiding students to create counternarratives and supporting student ideas and voices. Respondents mentioned activities that enabled their students to recreate media texts with a critical lens. These counternarratives included recreating superhero comic books, news, advertisements, digital storytelling, national holiday observances, and poems. A high school English teacher noted, “after analyzing recent and popular superhero comic books, my students used the comic medium to tell an autobiographical story wherein they exhibited power in the face of oppression.” A middle school English teacher reported:

The most memorable lesson I’ve taught involving critical media literacy was a unit based on perseverance and the power of the human spirit in regards to power structures and oppression. After analyzing multiple types of media, students created their own VoiceThread using spoken word in order to share their own messages of perseverance. It was incredibly powerful to hear their messages.

For most respondents, the notion of enabling their students to share personal stories using multimedia tools meant that they were integrating critical media pedagogy into their teaching practice. Traditionally, personal and experiential knowledge as a form of literacy is not often valued; thus, it is a critical pedagogical orientation to encourage students to recreate media texts that reflect their intersecting realities and challenge the pervasive dominant ideologies. Students’ personal histories become scholarly pursuits when digital storytelling encompasses media production skills taught through a critical media literacy (CML) framework. Vasquez (2017) asserts, “students learn best when what they are learning has importance in their lives, using the topics, issues, and questions that they raise should therefore be an important part of creating the classroom curriculum” (p. 8). A middle school math and technology teacher commented about incorporating CML into her master’s inquiry project:

The project we ultimately created was a digital storytelling project, in which students interviewed their parents or someone they admire and created some sort of media project around that story to tell counter-narratives to the dominant story told in media about people of color.

Guiding students to create counternarratives can be an empowering instructional strategy that nurtures their personal realities and supports their voice. Considering the context of urban education, it becomes particularly important for low-income students and students of color, who have been historically denied the power to be heard, to engage in their learning as empowered subjects through creating digital counter-narratives.

Politics of Representation

A major difference between critical media literacy (CML) and the more common media literacy practiced in the United States is the rigorous examination of the politics of representation; an analysis of how historically disenfranchised social groups are represented in media ( Funk et al., 2016 ). Many of the respondents discussed analyzing issues related to representations of different identities with their students. A high school visual arts teacher reported that through “using current events in the media, students created headline news with people of color perspective.” The majority of the responses highlighted engaging in discussions related to gender and a few responses about race. One elementary teacher noted:

My grade level did a Critical Media Literacy unit and after it was over, a week later, a student showed me a box of Chips Ahoy cookies and said that it was made to be sold to boys and girls. She compared it to a rainbow pop tarts box made for girls and a basketball cereal box made for boys that we had discussed during the CML unit.

A high school social science teacher reported:

My 11th and 12th grade Sociology class created representation boards. Each group was assigned an identity (‘white male,’ ‘Asian male,’ ‘black female,’ etc.). When each group was done, we compared the images and discussed the similarities between representations of race and gender. It really opened their eyes.

The politics of representation explores the complexities and intersections of identity markers, such as ethnicity, culture, gender, class, sexual orientation, religion, and ableism. Several candidates alluded to the intersectionality between race and gender in their responses, mostly engaging their students in discussions related to the unequal representation and socialization of gender roles. They also noted that discussing stereotypical gender roles challenged their students’ internalized notions of gender. Responses such as the following highlight the shift in their students’ perspectives about gender: An elementary teacher wrote, “We’ve had some successful discussions around gender stereotypes and I’ve heard the language change in the classroom and students be more thoughtful about others’ choices.” Another elementary teacher reported, “My students showed greater acceptance. After teaching a lesson invoking gender all my male students felt accepted to choose any color paper—the favorite was pink for the rest of the year.”

Making Critical Connections

In response to the open-ended questions, an array of items was mentioned that demonstrate critical engagement, from teaching about racism and whitewashing, to numerous examples of analyzing gender and sexism, as well as projects on environmental justice and climate change at all grade levels. Some respondents discussed their transformative practice through the way their students analyzed and created media to make critical connections between historical and current events.

A high school social science teacher stated, “I had students create videos explaining the situation in Ukraine and relating it to the Cold War. In United States history, I often had students look at political cartoons and think about current examples of imperialism and how they’re represented in media.” Similarly, another social science teacher described a memorable moment of teaching critical media literacy (CML) as: “When students could make the connection between yellow journalism in Spanish-American War and media sensationalism during the War on Terror.” An elementary school teacher wrote:

My students began to think critically about history after showing them the spoken word poem ‘History Textbooks,’ which talked about world history being American Propaganda. Through this poem, they began questioning: who gets to write history and whose stories are told? It was a really powerful lesson we returned to over and over again throughout my course.

Analyzing media texts by acknowledging their historical continuity is vital because marginalization and exploitation are historically bound. Discovering these historical connections helps teachers and students learn how dominance and ideology are perpetuated, transcending time and space. Bridging the gap between the past and the present enables students to identify the common thread of hegemony across various spheres of social life. This instructional approach of CML promotes critical thinking with a social justice emphasis.

Another topic on which respondents commented was using CML to teach about environmental issues, especially the climate crisis. This is an important area for CML, since so many media messages about climate change distort the scientific evidence and mislead the public ( Beach et al., 2017 ; Share & Beach, 2022 ). A high school science teacher reported, “My class analyzed the politics behind climate change denial and how climate change is represented in the media. It was very easy for my students to see the connection between the message and its creators.” Exploring the connection between media ownership and media messages, another high school science teacher commented that a memorable moment was having a “discussion with students about where they were getting their information about environmental issues, and talking about who owns and controls Univision.”

In addition to becoming more aware, being engaged in critical analysis and creating counternarratives, some respondents noted that their students had engaged in political, environmental, and social media activism. A high school science teacher mentioned:

My class was looking at environmental justice and one student took that information and used it for an English project she was working on and that project transformed into a petition to the city council to plant more trees as her contribution to offsetting pollution in the inner city.

Another science teacher reported about how his “students created social media campaigns to raise awareness about animals affected by climate change. Different groups created the ‘Puffin Dance’ and #peekatmypika to help their campaigns get going.” A kindergarten teacher wrote about her students creating a video with opinion posters for change they shared with their school community.

Activism can be enacted in multiple ways; some efforts are more explicit, like petitions and protests, while others are more subtle, such as creating alternative media. Teacher responses reflect their students’ activism related to social, environmental, and political issues materialized through local and issue-specific efforts.

In analyzing the responses, we found many encouraging and hopeful comments about how critical media literacy (CML) has helped teachers rethink their pedagogy and increase student engagement. However, the responses also highlight challenges for implementing CML, such as limited resources, support, and clarity about how to integrate it into the curriculum. An elementary teacher wrote about the scarcity of technology at the school and how that “makes it difficult to do anything around critical media.” From the answers to Question 7 (incorporating CML into my teaching is difficult), secondary teachers reported more difficulty teaching CML (35% VF/F) than elementary teachers (26% VF/F). This is another place where the potential for CML in the lower grades surfaced, since they seem to have less difficulty incorporating it than secondary teachers. The design of most elementary classrooms, which requires the same teacher to cover all subject matter to the same group of students throughout the day, opens the potential for integrating CML pedagogy through thematic teaching, project-based learning, or problem-posing pedagogy.

A first-year middle school social science teacher shared wanting to use more CML, but had little departmental and administrative support. An elementary teacher shared about an administrator who “is reluctant to have me teach how to be critical of all media.” Three responses focused on wanting more resources, instructional strategies, and school-appropriate material in order to be able to implement CML in their classrooms. These qualitative statements of lack of support can be seen in the quantitative responses to Question 10 in which respondents rated the statement: “I feel supported by people at my school when teaching critical media literacy”: 36% VF/F, 24% occasionally, 18% rarely, 6% never felt supported, and 17% not applicable.

The group that shared the most challenges for implementing CML consisted of five teachers who taught secondary math and science. Their qualitative responses broadly discussed the difficulty of integrating CML into their content and finding only limited application. One of these responses from a high school math teacher mentioned:

I remember how when I was in the [CML] class, it seemed all over the place. I was unable to fully find the purpose of the class and how we can use it in a math class. In a traditional math class, such as Pre-Calculus or Calculus, it was rather difficult to find ways to incorporate the idea of CML.

This same person also commented that once he began teaching statistics, he was able to find ways to integrate CML. Of the 34 math teachers who answered Question 7, 59% of them reported that incorporating CML into their teaching was difficult VF/F. This is about double the VF/F responses from the other subjects.

A high school math teacher saw the value in teaching students CML but limited its application to challenging students’ misinformation about math and who is or is not a mathematician:

Critical Media Literacy is pretty important for students, especially in an age where they’re exposed to various forms of media, a lot of which is very skewed in one way or the other, and usually takes a reductionist viewpoint of the issues it addresses. I try to use CML to help students understand the misinformation about mathematics, the nature of mathematics, and challenge stereotypes of who is or isn’t a mathematician (examples: Not all mathematicians are white or Asian, there are Latino and African/African American mathematicians, there are mathematicians from faith backgrounds, mathematics isn’t just about calculations, etc.).

Two additional respondents also acknowledged the benefits of CML but felt challenged by the additional work needed to integrate it into the curriculum. A high school science teacher shared:

When I took the Critical Media Literacy class, it felt like it was more geared towards the humanities and not necessarily for the sciences. While it would be great to come up with lessons that connect chemistry and critical media literacy, it is immensely time-consuming when I can’t find other people to brainstorm with.

Another secondary science teacher also felt CML was important but struggled to find ways to integrate it into the classroom:

It was a great shared learning space and I got a ton of inspiration from taking the class; however, it has been difficult to use CML when direct instruction does focus on the explanation of scientific concepts. That’s not to say it is impossible, it just does take one more step of planning and student buy in.

Researchers in Canada found that after teaching CML concepts and skills in a Language Arts methods course, their preservice teachers felt enthusiastic about teaching media literacy, but challenged when designing CML lessons ( Robertson & Hughes, 2011 , p. 51). Robertson and Hughes (2011) list five reasons why teaching CML was so challenging for their students: (1) when these preservice teachers were K-12 students, most did not experience CML lessons; (2) the majority of their mentor teachers did not teach CML or know much about it; (3) critical analysis practices are not easy; (4) few resources are available; and (5) some schools have little technology and technical support. These are many of the same challenges that our teachers reported.

Intent and Importance of Incorporating Critical Media Literacy

Numerous teachers wrote about how meaningful, vital, transformative, and important this class was for them. A high school science teacher shared that the critical media literacy (CML) class, “was transformative! I’m still working on ways to fully integrate what I learned, but I have had my students creating media ever since.” A middle school English teacher commented about how the CML class “gave us techniques, projects, lessons that we can incorporate in our classrooms. Teaching students how to be critical of information related through the media is highly important because student[s] gain that critical awareness necessary for a technology-based society!”

A desire to bring more CML into the classroom surfaced throughout many of the qualitative responses. When asked to indicate any additional comments, 16 out of 64 respondents (25%) expressed their intention to integrate concepts related to media literacy or CML. A high school math teacher who wrote about having students create ads to represent data in graphs stated, “I wish I could incorporate more. I’ll keep trying.” A kindergarten teacher commented, “I wish I had more time to engage my students in this topic. As I grow in experience and expertise, I incorporate it more and more. Teaching in urban areas is a challenge but I do find the ideas of the course to be valuable in the classroom.”

The data and voices of these teachers raise practical, theoretical, and policy implications for future work in supporting teachers in adopting a pedagogical approach that can ignite engagement, make learning relevant, and deepen critical thinking with media, technology, and all information. In order for this to happen, teacher education programs need to address some of the challenges and limitations highlighted in the study.

The teachers surveyed reported challenges for implementing critical media literacy (CML) such as limited access to resources, lack of support, and a struggle to understand how to integrate it into the curriculum. This was especially evident for the math and science teachers. CML courses need to help teachers in all content areas rethink the silo approach to separate subject matter instruction and recognize the ways literacy is used in all areas and how information is connected to students’ lives through issues of power, privilege, and pleasure. To help teachers integrate CML into the curriculum, it is important for them to see content and grade-level examples while also receiving ongoing support and resources.

One way to support teachers in various subject matter is to create groups or projects modeled after the Stanford History Education Group (SHEG) or the Center X professional development projects. 4 The SHEG is a research and development group that provides free online resources and lesson plans for history teachers to support students in developing historical thinking skills. In a similar way, the Center X projects provide resources, lesson ideas, and professional development to support working teachers and administrators, while also creating curriculum, providing trainings, and engaging in research. The creation of a CML project or research and development group could provide ongoing professional development for new and experienced teachers in order to sustain CML implementation and support the growth of CML as an important field of investigation.

In-service teachers in our survey reported higher rates of integration of CML, perhaps because experienced teachers have figured out issues of classroom management, lesson planning, and how to balance work and life expectations. As a result, they are better situated to build and expand their curricula and teaching practices to bring CML into their classrooms. While creating a site modeled after the SHEG or Center X projects will require a significant investment of time and money, a more immediate and economical way to provide support for preservice teachers could be through integrating CML across various teacher preparation courses, especially in methods classes. This integration would require working with teacher educators to explore the CML theoretical framework and co-construct new practices and curricula for integrating these ideas throughout different content areas.

Despite the challenges reported by our teachers, the data also suggest promising possibilities for CML. While we do not claim causality between their teaching and the CML course, the data provide a window into how our preservice and in-service teachers have supported critical engagement with the information, entertainment, and social media embedded in the lives of students.

The similarities between elementary and secondary teachers suggest that CML can be just as appropriate for lower grades as it is commonly assumed to be for older students. The work in critical literacy by Comber (2013) and Vasquez (2014) offers support for the notion that young children can engage deeply in critical thinking and social justice education. The elementary teachers in our study demonstrate these ideas through the work they have done to engage their young students with media analysis and critical media production from kindergarten on up. While some teachers reported deep levels of critical analysis more often than others, many expressed their belief in the importance of CML and their desire to teach about social justice. Vasquez (2017) reminds us that critical literacy should not be a topic to teach: “Instead it should be looked on as a lens, frame, or perspective for teaching throughout the day, across the curriculum, and perhaps beyond. What this means is that critical literacy involves having a critical perspective or way of being” (p. 8). Developing social justice educators who internalize a critical way of looking at the world and questioning systems of power is the project for which CML provides a pragmatic framework and pedagogy.

It is impressive to see the majority of teachers reporting that using CML encourages critical thinking, something more important than ever in the age of fake news and alternative facts. There is hope in the teachers’ voices as they describe the activities they have been doing with their students, the successes they have encountered, and the challenges they have struggled to overcome. The comments about their intentions to teach CML and the importance they attribute to teaching these concepts provide encouragement for teacher educators to embrace CML. More than anything, the data demonstrate the potential for teaching CML in elementary and secondary settings with preservice and in-service teachers and in all content areas, even though some are more challenging than others. The use of media and technology offers opportunities for teachers to build on students’ prior knowledge, create a bridge to connect the outside world with school learning, and provide the raw material to examine everyday experiences of power, marginalization, and resistance.

Simply integrating media into the curriculum is not enough to develop critical literacies given the changing and multiple literacies associated with new digital information and communication technologies and practices. In the contemporary moment, there is a pressing pedagogical need to navigate the increasingly consequential artificial intelligence (AI) systems that collect, collate, process, predict and disseminate information determined by algorithms. Data from the survey suggest that our teachers are teaching more with media than critically analyzing it. Further studies are needed in order to better understand how to develop teachers’ CML frameworks and support more implementation.

Preparing educators to teach CML is not easy, and unfortunately, few institutes of higher education are attempting the challenge. However, it is possible, and in fact, it can be highly rewarding. By listening to the voices of teachers who have taken a CML course, we see the potential. As one high school science teacher commented, “CML changed me, changed my teaching, continues to change my students.”

While information communication technologies are integrating into all aspects of our lives, we are also witnessing increasing divisions between the haves and have nots, out-of-control climate change, and the weaponization of information and media. In order to create a socially just democratic society and sustainable planet, we must have people who can critically read and write the word and the world ( Freire & Macedo, 1987 ). The need for CML has never been greater. A high school English teacher wrote, “there is no literacy without media literacy. There is not critical pedagogy without critical media literacy.” It is our hope that this article serves as a resource to continue exploring the potential that CML offers to transform students, schools, and society.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the following educators who helped us design and teach this critical media literacy course: Shani Byard, Peter Carlson, Steven Funk, Antero Garcia, Mark Gomez, Clifford Lee, Elexia Reyes-McGovern, and Martin Romero. We are grateful to Megan Franke for her guidance with the creation of the survey. We also appreciate the assistance of Jarod Kawasaki, Jose-Felipe Martinez, and Brandon McMillan with helping to organize the survey data.

Further Reading

• Funk, S. , Kellner, D. , & Share, J. (2016). Critical media literacy as transformative pedagogy. In M. N. Yildiz & J. Keengwe (Eds.), Handbook of research on media literacy in the digital age (pp. 1–30). IGI Global.
• Goodman, S. (2003). Teaching youth media: A critical guide to literacy, video production, and social change . Teachers College Press.
• Hammer, R. , & Kellner, D. (Eds.). (2009). Media/cultural studies: Critical approaches . Peter Lang.
• Kellner, D. , & Share, J. (2019). The critical media literacy guide: Engaging media and transforming education . Brill/Sense Publishers.
• López, A. (2021). Ecomedia literacy: Integrating ecology into media education . Routledge.
• Luke, A. , & Freebody, P. (1997). Shaping the social practices of reading. In S. Muspratt , A. Luke , & P. Freebody (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies: Teaching and learning textual practice (pp. 185–225). Allen & Unwin, Hampton Press.
• Morrell, E. , Dueñas, R. , Garcia, V. , & López, J. (2013). Critical media pedagogy: Teaching for achievement in city schools . Teachers College Press.
• Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression . New York University Press.
• O’Connor, A. (2006). Raymond Williams . Rowman & Littlefield.
• Share, J. (2015). Media literacy is elementary: Teaching youth to critically read and create media (2nd ed.). Peter Lang.
• Vasquez, V. (2014). Negotiating critical literacies with young children (10th anniversary ed.). Routledge.
• Beach, R. , Share, J. , & Webb, A. (2017). Teaching climate change to adolescents: Reading, writing, and making a difference . Routledge.
• Breakstone, J. , Smith, M. , Wineburg, S. , Rapaport, A. , Carle, J. , Garland, M. , & Saavedra, A. (2021). Students’ civic online reasoning: A national portrait . Educational Researcher , 50 (8), 505–515.
• Buckingham, D. (2003). Media education: Literacy, learning and contemporary culture . Polity Press.
• Butler, A. (2020). Educating media literacy: The need for teacher education in media literacy . Brill-Sense.
• California Commission on Teacher Credentialing . (2016). California teaching performance expectations .
• California Common Core State Standards . (2013). https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/finalelaccssstandards.pdf
• Carlson, P. , Share, J. , & Lee, C. (2013). Critical media literacy: Pedagogy for the digital age. Oregon English Journal , 35 (1), 50–55.
• Comber, B. (2013). Critical literacy in the early years: Emergence and sustenance in an age of accountability. In J. Larson & J. Marsh (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of early childhood literacy (pp. 587–601). SAGE.
• Dewey, J. (1963). Experience and education . Macmillan.
• Domine, V. (2011). Building 21st-century teachers: An intentional pedagogy of media literacy education. Action in Teacher Education , 33 (2), 194–205.
• Flores-Koulish, S. A. , Deal, D. , Losinger, J. , McCarthy, K. , & Rosebrugh, E. (2011). After the media literacy course: Three early childhood teachers look back. Action in Teacher Education , 33 , 127–143.
• Freire, P. (2010). Pedagogy of the oppressed ( M. B. Ramos, Trans.). The Continuum International Publishing Group.
• Freire, P. , & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word & the world . Bergin & Garvey.
• Garcia, A. , Seglem, R. , & Share, J. (2013). Transforming teaching and learning through critical media literacy pedagogy. LEARNing Landscapes , 6 (2), 109–124.
• Garii, B. , & Rule, A. C. (2009). Integrating social justice with mathematics and science: An analysis of student teacher lessons. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research and Studies , 25 (3), 490–499.
• Gretter, S. , & Yadav, A. (2018). What do preservice teachers think about teaching media literacy? An exploratory study using the theory of planned behavior. Journal of Media Literacy Education , 10 (1), 104–123.
• Grizzle, A. , & Wilson, C. (Eds.). (2011). Media and information literacy: Curriculum for teachers . United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
• Hall, S. (2003). The whites of their eyes: Racist ideologies and the media. In G. Dines & J. M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race, and class in media: A text reader (2nd ed., pp. 89–93). SAGE.
• Hart, A. (Ed.). (1998). Teaching the media: International perspectives . Erlbaum.
• Hobbs, R. (2007a). Approaches to instruction and teacher education in media literacy (Research paper commissioned within the United Nations Literacy Decade). UNESCO Regional Conferences in Support of Global Literacy.
• Hobbs, R. (2007b). Reading the media: Media literacy in high school English . Teachers College Press.
• Hobbs, R. , Moen, M. , Tang, R. , & Steager, P. (2022). Measuring the implementation of media literacy instructional practices in schools: Community stakeholder perspectives . Learning, Media and Technology .
• Jhally, S. (2003). Image-based culture: Advertising and popular culture. In G. Dines & J. M. Humez (Eds.), Gender, race, and class in media: A text-reader (2nd ed.). SAGE.
• Joanou, J. P. (2017). Examining the world around us: Critical media literacy in teacher education. Multicultural Perspectives , 19 (1), 40–46.
• Kaplún, M. (1998). Una pedagogía de la comunicación . Ediciones de la Torre.
• Kellner, D. (1995). Media culture: Cultural studies, identity and politics between the modern and the postmodern . Routledge.
• Kellner, D. , & Share, J. (2007). Critical media literacy, democracy, and the reconstruction of education . In D. Macedo & S. R. Steinberg (Eds.), Media literacy: A reader (pp. 3–23). Peter Lang.
• Kincheloe, J. (2007). Critical pedagogy: Primer . Peter Lang.
• Kirwan, T. , Learmonth, J. , Sayer, M. , & Williams, R. (2003). Mapping media literacy: Media education 11–16 years in the United Kingdom . British Film Institute, Broadcasting Standards Commission, Independent Television Commission.
• Kist, W. , & Christel, M. T. (Eds.). (2022). Special issues: Critical media literacy: Bringing critical media literacy into ELA Classrooms, 2 . National Council of Teachers of English.
• Krashen, S. (1995). Bilingual education and second language acquisition theory. In D. Durkin (Ed.), Language issues: Readings for teachers (pp. 90–116). Longman.
• Kubey, R. (Ed.). (1997). Media literacy in the information age: Current perspectives . Transaction.
• Livingstone, S. (2018, May 8). Media literacy—everyone’s favourite solution to the problems of regulation [Web log post].
• Lynch, T. L. (2021). (Ed.). Special issues: Critical media literacy: Bringing lives to texts, 1 . National Council of Teachers of English.
• Meehan, J. , Ray, B. , Walker, A. , Wells, S. , & Schwarz, G. (2015). Media literacy in teacher education: A good fit across the curriculum. Journal of Media Literacy Education , 7 (2), 81–86.
• Mihailidis, P. (2008). Are we speaking the same language? Assessing the state of media literacy in U.S. higher education. Studies in Media & Information Literacy Education , 8 (4), 1–14.
• Moore, D. C. , & Bonilla, E. (2014). Media literacy education & the common core state standards: NAMLE an educator’s guide . National Association for Media Literacy Education.
• National Council of Teachers of English . (2022, April 9). Media Education in English Language Arts .
• Pegurer Caprino, M. , & Martínez-Cerdá, J. (2016). Media literacy in Brazil: Experiences and models of non-formal education. Comunicar , 24 (49), 39–48.
• Pérez-Tornero, J. M. , & Tayie, S. (2012). Introduction. Teacher training in media education: Curriculum and international experiences . Comunicar , 20 (39), 10–14.
• Prinsloo, J. , & Criticos, C. (Eds.). (1991). Media matters in South Africa . Media Resource Centre.
• Ranieri, M. , & Bruni, I. (2018). Promoting digital and media competencies of pre- and in-service teachers: Research findings of a project from six European countries. Journal of e-Learning and Knowledge Society , 14 (2), 111–125.
• Rideout, V. , Lauricella, A. , & Wartella, E. (2011). Children, media, and race: Media use among white, black, hispanic, and Asian American children . Center on Media and Human Development School of Communication, Northwestern University.
• Robertson, L. , & Hughes, J. M. (2011). Investigating pre-service teachers’ understandings of critical media literacy. Language & Literacy , 13 (2), 37–53.
• Rogow, F. (2018, August 1). How to adjust your “brights” to see through the fog of “fake” news [Web log post]
• Schwarz, G. (2001). Literacy expanded: The role of media literacy in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly , 28 (2), 111–119.
• Share, J. , & Beach, R. (2022). Critical media literacy analysis and production for systems thinking about climate change . The Journal of Media Literacy: Research Symposium Issue.
• Share, J. , & Gambino, A. (2022). A framework, disposition, and pedagogy for teaching critical media literacy. In W. Kist & M. T. Christel (Eds.), special issues: Critical media literacy, volume 2 : Bringing critical media literacy into ELA classrooms (pp. 11–17). National Council of Teachers of English.
• Tiede, J. , Grafe, S. , & Hobbs, R. (2015). Pedagogical media competencies of preservice teachers in Germany and the United States: A comparative analysis of theory and practice. Peabody Journal of Education , 90 (4), 533–545.
• Trust, T. , Maloy, R. , Butler, A. & Goodman, L. (2022). Critical media literacy in teacher education: Discerning truth amidst a crisis of misinformation and disinformation. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education , 30 (2), 167–176.
• Vasquez, V. M. (2017). Curriculum and pedagogy, educational purposes and ideals, education theories and philosophies . In G. W. Noblit (Ed.), Oxford research encyclopedia of education . Oxford University Press.
• Vogels, E. , Gelles-Watnick, R. , & Massarat, N. (2022). Teens, social media & technology 2018 . Pew Research Center.
• Vosoughi, S. , Roy, D. , & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science , 359 (6380), 1146–1151.
• Wilson, C. (2012). Media and information literacy: Pedagogy and possibilities . Comunicar , 20 (39), 15–22.
• Wilson, C. , & Duncan, B. (2009). Implementing mandates in media education: The Ontario experience. Comunicar , 32 (16), 127–140.

1. The UNESCO Media and Information Literacy Curriculum can be found at the following location.

2. These can be found at the Center for Media Literacy website .

3. See The UCLA Library Critical Media Literacy Research Guide .

4. The Stanford History Education Group (SHEG) and the Center X site is at UCLA CENTER X PREPARES & SUPPORTS EDUCATORS .

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Education. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 24 April 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|185.80.151.41]
• 185.80.151.41

Character limit 500 /500

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

The Use of Critical Thinking to Identify Fake News: A Systematic Literature Review

Paul machete.

Department of Informatics, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0001 South Africa

Marita Turpin

With the large amount of news currently being published online, the ability to evaluate the credibility of online news has become essential. While there are many studies involving fake news and tools on how to detect it, there is a limited amount of work that focuses on the use of information literacy to assist people to critically access online information and news. Critical thinking, as a form of information literacy, provides a means to critically engage with online content, for example by looking for evidence to support claims and by evaluating the plausibility of arguments. The purpose of this study is to investigate the current state of knowledge on the use of critical thinking to identify fake news. A systematic literature review (SLR) has been performed to identify previous studies on evaluating the credibility of news, and in particular to see what has been done in terms of the use of critical thinking to evaluate online news. During the SLR’s sifting process, 22 relevant studies were identified. Although some of these studies referred to information literacy, only three explicitly dealt with critical thinking as a means to identify fake news. The studies on critical thinking noted critical thinking as an essential skill for identifying fake news. The recommendation of these studies was that information literacy be included in academic institutions, specifically to encourage critical thinking.

Introduction

The information age has brought a significant increase in available sources of information; this is in line with the unparalleled increase in internet availability and connection, in addition to the accessibility of technological devices [ 1 ]. People no longer rely on television and print media alone for obtaining news, but increasingly make use of social media and news apps. The variety of information sources that we have today has contributed to the spread of alternative facts [ 1 ]. With over 1.8 billion active users per month in 2016 [ 2 ], Facebook accounted for 20% of total traffic to reliable websites and up to 50% of all the traffic to fake news sites [ 3 ]. Twitter comes second to Facebook, with over 400 million active users per month [ 2 ]. Posts on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter spread rapidly due to how they attempt to grab the readers’ attention as quickly as possible, with little substantive information provided, and thus create a breeding ground for the dissemination of fake news [ 4 ].

While social media is a convenient way of accessing news and staying connected to friends and family, it is not easy to distinguish real news from fake news on social media [ 5 ]. Social media continues to contribute to the increasing distribution of user-generated information; this includes hoaxes, false claims, fabricated news and conspiracy theories, with primary sources being social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter [ 6 ]. This means that any person who is in possession of a device, which can connect to the internet, is potentially a consumer or distributor of fake news. While social media platforms and search engines do not encourage people to believe the information being circulated, they are complicit in people’s propensity to believe the information they come across on these platforms, without determining their validity [ 6 ]. The spread of fake news can cause a multitude of damages to the subject; varying from reputational damage of an individual, to having an effect on the perceived value of a company [ 7 ].

The purpose of this study is to investigate the use of critical thinking methods to detect news stories that are untrue or otherwise help to develop a critical attitude to online news. This work was performed by means of a systematic literature review (SLR). The paper is presented as follows. The next section provides background information on fake news, its importance in the day-to-day lives of social media users and how information literacy and critical thinking can be used to identify fake news. Thereafter, the SLR research approach is discussed. Following this, the findings of the review are reported, first in terms of descriptive statistics and the in terms of a thematic analysis of the identified studies. The paper ends with the Conclusion and recommendations.

Background: Fake News, Information Literacy and Critical Thinking

This section discusses the history of fake news, the fake news that we know today and the role of information literacy can be used to help with the identification of fake news. It also provides a brief definition of critical thinking.

The History of Fake News

Although fake news has received increased attention recently, the term has been used by scholars for many years [ 4 ]. Fake news emerged from the tradition of yellow journalism of the 1890s, which can be described as a reliance on the familiar aspects of sensationalism—crime news, scandal and gossip, divorces and sex, and stress upon the reporting of disasters, sports sensationalism as well as possibly satirical news [ 5 ]. The emergence of online news in the early 2000s raised concerns, among them being that people who share similar ideologies may form “echo chambers” where they can filter out alternative ideas [ 2 ]. This emergence came about as news media transformed from one that was dominated by newspapers printed by authentic and trusted journalists to one where online news from an untrusted source is believed by many [ 5 ]. The term later grew to describe “satirical news shows”, “parody news shows” or “fake-news comedy shows” where a television show, or segment on a television show was dedicated to political satire [ 4 ]. Some of these include popular television shows such as The Daily Show (now with Trevor Noah), Saturday Night Live ’s “The Weekend Update” segment, and other similar shows such as Last Week Tonight with John Oliver and The Colbert Report with Stephen Colbert [ 4 ]. News stories in these shows were labelled “fake” not because of their content, but for parodying network news for the use of sarcasm, and using comedy as a tool to engage real public issues [ 4 ]. The term “Fake News” further became prominent during the course of the 2016 US presidential elections, as members of the opposing parties would post incorrect news headlines in order to sway the decision of voters [ 6 ].

Fake News Today

The term fake news has a more literal meaning today [ 4 ]. The Macquarie Dictionary named fake news the word of the year for 2016 [ 8 ]. In this dictionary, fake news is described it as a word that captures a fascinating evolution in the creation of deceiving content, also allowing people to believe what they see fit. There are many definitions for the phrase, however, a concise description of the term can be found in Paskin [ 4 ] who states that certain news articles originating from either social media or mainstream (online or offline) platforms, that are not factual, but are presented as such and are not satirical, are considered fake news. In some instances, editorials, reports, and exposés may be knowingly disseminating information with intent to deceive for the purposes of monetary or political benefit [ 4 ].

A distinction amongst three types of fake news can be made on a conceptual level, namely: serious fabrications, hoaxes and satire [ 3 ]. Serious fabrications are explained as news items written on false information, including celebrity gossip. Hoaxes refer to false information provided via social media, aiming to be syndicated by traditional news platforms. Lastly, satire refers to the use of humour in the news to imitate real news, but through irony and absurdity. Some examples of famous satirical news platforms in circulation in the modern day are The Onion and The Beaverton , when contrasted with real news publishers such as The New York Times [ 3 ].

Although there are many studies involving fake news and tools on how to detect it, there is a limited amount of academic work that focuses on the need to encourage information literacy so that people are able to critically access the information they have been presented, in order to make better informed decisions [ 9 ].

Stein-Smith [ 5 ] urges that information/media literacy has become a more critical skill since the appearance of the notion of fake news has become public conversation. Information literacy is no longer a nice-to-have proficiency but a requirement for interpreting news headlines and participation in public discussions. It is essential for academic institutions of higher learning to present information literacy courses that will empower students and staff members with the prerequisite tools to identify, select, understand and use trustworthy information [ 1 ]. Outside of its academic uses, information literacy is also a lifelong skill with multiple applications in everyday life [ 5 ]. The choices people make in their lives, and opinions they form need to be informed by the appropriate interpretation of correct, opportune, and significant information [ 5 ].

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking covers a broad range of skills that includes the following: verbal reasoning skills; argument analysis; thinking as hypothesis testing; dealing with likelihood and uncertainties; and decision making and problem solving skills [ 10 ]. For the purpose of this study, where we are concerned with the evaluation of the credibility of online news, the following definition will be used: critical thinking is “the ability to analyse and evaluate arguments according to their soundness and credibility, respond to arguments and reach conclusions through deduction from given information” [ 11 ]. In this study, we want to investigate how the skills mentioned by [ 11 ] can be used as part of information literacy, to better identify fake news.

The next section presents the research approach that was followed to perform the SLR.

Research Method

This section addresses the research question, the search terms that were applied to a database in relation to the research question, as well as the search criteria used on the search results. The following research question was addressed in this SLR:

• What is the role of critical thinking in identifying fake news, according to previous studies?

The research question was identified in accordance to the research topic. The intention of the research question is to determine if the identified studies in this review provide insights into the use of critical thinking to evaluate the credibility of online news and in particular to identify fake news.

Delimitations.

In the construction of this SLR, the following definitions of fake news and other related terms have been excluded, following the suggestion of [ 2 ]:

• Unintentional reporting mistakes;
• Rumours that do not originate from a particular news article;
• Conspiracy theories;
• Satire that is unlikely to be misconstrued as factual;
• False statements by politicians; and
• Reports that are slanted or misleading, but not outright false.

Search Terms.

The database tool used to extract sources to conduct the SLR was Google Scholar ( https://scholar.google.com ). The process for extracting the sources involved executing the search string on Google Scholar and the retrieval of the articles and their meta-data into a tool called Mendeley, which was used for reference management.

The search string used to retrieve the sources was defined below:

(“critical think*” OR “critically (NEAR/2) reason*” OR “critical (NEAR/2) thought*” OR “critical (NEAR/2) judge*” AND “fake news” AND (identify* OR analyse* OR find* OR describe* OR review).

To construct the search criteria, the following factors have been taken into consideration: the research topic guided the search string, as the key words were used to create the base search criteria. The second step was to construct the search string according to the search engine requirements on Google Scholar.

Selection Criteria.

The selection criteria outlined the rules applied in the SLR to identify sources, narrow down the search criteria and focus the study on a specific topic. The inclusion and exclusion criteria are outlined in Table  1 to show which filters were applied to remove irrelevant sources.

Table 1.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria for paper selection

Source Selection.

The search criteria were applied on the online database and 91 papers were retrieved. The criteria in Table  1 were used on the search results in order to narrow down the results to appropriate papers only.

PRISMA Flowchart.

The selection criteria included four stages of filtering and this is depicted in Fig.  1 . In then Identification stage, the 91 search results from Google Scholar were returned and 3 sources were derived from the sources already identified from the search results, making a total of 94 available sources. In the screening stage, no duplicates were identified. After a thorough screening of the search results, which included looking at the availability of the article (free to use), 39 in total records were available – to which 55 articles were excluded. Of the 39 articles, nine were excluded based on their titles and abstract being irrelevant to the topic in the eligibility stage. A final list of 22 articles was included as part of this SLR. As preparation for the data analysis, a data extraction table was made that classified each article according to the following: article author; article title; theme (a short summary of the article); year; country; and type of publication. The data extraction table assisted in the analysis of findings as presented in the next section.

PRISMA flowchart

Analysis of Findings

Descriptive statistics.

Due to the limited number of relevant studies, the information search did not have a specified start date. Articles were included up to 31 August 2019. The majority of the papers found were published in 2017 (8 papers) and 2018 (9 papers). This is in line with the term “fake news” being announced the word of the year in the 2016 [ 8 ].

The selected papers were classified into themes. Figure  2 is a Venn diagram that represents the overlap of articles by themes across the review. Articles that fall under the “fake news” theme had the highest number of occurrences, with 11 in total. Three articles focused mainly on “Critical Thinking”, and “Information Literacy” was the main focus of four articles. Two articles combined all three topics of critical thinking, information literacy, and fake news.

Venn diagram depicting the overlap of articles by main focus

An analysis of the number of articles published per country indicate that the US had a dominating amount of articles published on this topic, a total of 17 articles - this represents 74% of the selected articles in this review. The remaining countries where articles were published are Australia, Germany, Ireland, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Sweden - with each having one article published.

In terms of publication type, 15 of the articles were journal articles, four were reports, one was a thesis, one was a magazine article and one, a web page.

Discussion of Themes

The following emerged from a thematic analysis of the articles.

Fake News and Accountability.

With the influence that social media has on the drive of fake news [ 2 ], who then becomes responsible for the dissemination and intake of fake news by the general population? The immediate assumption is that in the digital age, social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter should be able to curate information, or do some form of fact-checking when posts are uploaded onto their platforms [ 12 ], but that leans closely to infringing on freedom of speech. While different authors agree that there need to be measures in place for the minimisation of fake news being spread [ 12 , 13 ], where that accountability lies differs between the authors. Metaxas and Mustafaraj [ 13 ] aimed to develop algorithms or plug-ins that can assist in trust and postulated that consumers should be able to identify misinformation, thus making an informed decision on whether to share that information or not. Lazer et al. [ 12 ] on the other hand, believe the onus should be on the platform owners to put restrictions on the kind of data distributed. Considering that the work by Metaxas and Mustafaraj [ 13 ] was done seven years ago, one can conclude that the use of fact-checking algorithms/plug-ins has not been successful in curbing the propulsion of fake news.

Fake News and Student Research.

There were a total of four articles that had a focus on student research in relation to fake news. Harris, Paskin and Stein-Smith [ 4 , 5 , 14 ] all agree that students do not have the ability to discern between real and fake news. A Stanford History Education Group study reveals that students are not geared up for distinguishing real from fake news [ 4 ]. Most students are able to perform a simple Google search for information; however, they are unable to identify the author of an online source, or if the information is misleading [ 14 ]. Furthermore, students are not aware of the benefits of learning information literacy in school in equipping them with the skills required to accurately identify fake news [ 5 ]. At the Metropolitan Campus of Fairleigh Dickson University, librarians have undertaken the role of providing training on information literacy skills for identifying fake news [ 5 ].

Fake News and Social Media.

A number of authors [ 6 , 15 ] are in agreement that social media, the leading source of news, is the biggest driving force for fake news. It provides substantial advantage to broadcast manipulated information. It is an open platform of unfiltered editors and open to contributions from all. According to Nielsen and Graves as well as Janetzko, [ 6 , 15 ], people are unable to identify fake news correctly. They are likely to associate fake news with low quality journalism than false information designed to mislead. Two articles, [ 15 ] and [ 6 ] discussed the role of critical thinking when interacting on social media. Social media presents information to us that has been filtered according to what we already consume, thereby making it a challenge for consumers to think critically. The study by Nielsen and Graves [ 6 ] confirm that students’ failure to verify incorrect online sources requires urgent attention as this could indicate that students are a simple target for presenting manipulated information.

Fake News That Drive Politics.

Two studies mention the effect of social and the spread of fake news, and how it may have propelled Donald Trump to win the US election in 2016 [ 2 , 16 ]. Also, [ 8 ] and [ 2 ] mention how a story on the Pope supporting Trump in his presidential campaign, was widely shared (more than a million times) on Facebook in 2016. These articles also point out how in the information age, fact-checking has become relatively easy, but people are more likely to trust their intuition on news stories they consume, rather than checking the reliability of a story. The use of paid trolls and Russian bots to populate social media feeds with misinformation in an effort to swing the US presidential election in Donald Trump’s favour, is highlighted [ 16 ]. The creation of fake news, with the use of alarmist headlines (“click bait”), generates huge traffic into the original websites, which drives up advertising revenue [ 2 ]. This means content creators are compelled to create fake news, to drive ad revenue on their websites - even though they may not be believe in the fake news themselves [ 2 ].

Information Literacy.

Information literacy is when a person has access to information, and thus can process the parts they need, and create ways in which to best use the information [ 1 ]. Teaching students the importance of information literacy skills is key, not only for identifying fake news but also for navigating life aspects that require managing and scrutinising information, as discussed by [ 1 , 17 ], and [ 9 ]. Courtney [ 17 ] highlights how journalism students, above students from other disciplines, may need to have some form of information literacy incorporated into their syllabi to increase their awareness of fake news stories, creating a narrative of being objective and reliable news creators. Courtney assessed different universities that teach journalism and media-related studies, and established that students generally lack awareness on how useful library services are in offering services related to information literacy. Courtney [ 17 ] and Rose-Wiles [ 9 ] discuss how the use of library resources should be normalised to students. With millennials and generation Z having social media as their first point of contact, Rose-Wiles [ 9 ] urges universities, colleges and other academic research institutes to promote the use of more library resources than those from the internet, to encourage students to lean on reliable sources. Overall, this may prove difficult, therefore Rose-Wiles [ 9 ] proposes that by teaching information literacy skills and critical thinking, students can use these skills to apply in any situation or information source.

Referred to as “truth decay”, people have reached a point where they no longer need to agree with facts [ 18 ]. Due to political polarisation, the general public hold the opinion of being part of an oppressed group of people, and therefore will believe a political leader who appeals to that narrative [ 18 ]. There needs to be tangible action put into driving civil engagement, to encourage people to think critically, analyse information and not believe everything they read.

Critical Thinking.

Only three of the articles had critical thinking as a main theme. Bronstein et al. [ 19 ] discuss how certain dogmatic and religious beliefs create a tendency in individuals to belief any information given, without them having a need to interrogate the information further and then deciding ion its veracity. The article further elaborates how these individuals are also more likely to engage in conspiracy theories, and tend to rationalise absurd events. Bronstein et al.’s [ 19 ] study conclude that dogmatism and religious fundamentalism highly correlate with a belief in fake news. Their study [ 19 ] suggests the use of interventions that aim to increase open-minded thinking, and also increase analytical thinking as a way to help religious, curb belief in fake news. Howlett [ 20 ] describes critical thinking as evidence-based practice, which is taking the theories of the skills and concepts of critical thinking and converting those for use in everyday applications. Jackson [ 21 ] explains how the internet purposely prides itself in being a platform for “unreviewed content”, due to the idea that people may not see said content again, therefore it needs to be attention-grabbing for this moment, and not necessarily accurate. Jackson [ 21 ] expands that social media affected critical thinking in how it changed the view on published information, what is now seen as old forms of information media. This then presents a challenge to critical thinking in that a large portion of information found on the internet is not only unreliable, it may also be false. Jackson [ 21 ] posits that one of the biggest dangers to critical thinking may be that people have a sense of perceived power for being able to find the others they seek with a simple web search. People are no longer interested in evaluation the credibility of the information they receive and share, and thus leading to the propagation of fake news [ 21 ].

Discussion of Findings

The aggregated data in this review has provided insight into how fake news is perceived, the level of attention it is receiving and the shortcomings of people when identifying fake news. Since the increase in awareness of fake news in 2016, there has been an increase in academic focus on the subject, with most of the articles published between 2017 and 2018. Fifty percent of the articles released focused on the subject of fake news, with 18% reflecting on information literacy, and only 13% on critical thinking.

The thematic discussion grouped and synthesised the articles in this review according to the main themes of fake news, information literacy and critical thinking. The Fake news and accountability discussion raised the question of who becomes accountable for the spreading of fake news between social media and the user. The articles presented a conclusion that fact-checking algorithms are not successful in reducing the dissemination of fake news. The discussion also included a focus on fake news and student research , whereby a Stanford History Education Group study revealed that students are not well educated in thinking critically and identifying real from fake news [ 4 ]. The Fake news and social media discussion provided insight on social media is the leading source of news as well as a contributor to fake news. It provides a challenge for consumers who are not able to think critically about online news, or have basic information literacy skills that can aid in identifying fake news. Fake news that drive politics highlighted fake news’ role in politics, particularly the 2016 US presidential elections and the influence it had on the voters [ 22 ].

Information literacy related publications highlighted the need for educating the public on being able to identify fake news, as well as the benefits of having information literacy as a life skill [ 1 , 9 , 17 ]. It was shown that students are often misinformed about the potential benefits of library services. The authors suggested that university libraries should become more recognised and involved as role-players in providing and assisting with information literacy skills.

The articles that focused on critical thinking pointed out two areas where a lack of critical thinking prevented readers from discerning between accurate and false information. In the one case, it was shown that people’s confidence in their ability to find information online gave made them overly confident about the accuracy of that information [ 21 ]. In the other case, it was shown that dogmatism and religious fundamentalism, which led people to believe certain fake news, were associated with a lack of critical thinking and a questioning mind-set [ 21 ].

The articles that focused on information literacy and critical thinking were in agreement on the value of promoting and teaching these skills, in particular to the university students who were often the subjects of the studies performed.

This review identified 22 articles that were synthesised and used as evidence to determine the role of critical thinking in identifying fake news. The articles were classified according to year of publication, country of publication, type of publication and theme. Based on the descriptive statistics, fake news has been a growing trend in recent years, predominantly in the US since the presidential election in 2016. The research presented in most of the articles was aimed at the assessment of students’ ability to identify fake news. The various studies were consistent in their findings of research subjects’ lack of ability to distinguish between true and fake news.

Information literacy emerged as a new theme from the studies, with Rose-Wiles [ 9 ] advising academic institutions to teach information literacy and encourage students to think critically when accessing online news. The potential role of university libraries to assist in not only teaching information literacy, but also assisting student to evaluate the credibility of online information, was highlighted. The three articles that explicitly dealt with critical thinking, all found critical thinking to be lacking among their research subjects. They further indicated how this lack of critical thinking could be linked to people’s inability to identify fake news.

This review has pointed out people’s general inability to identify fake news. It highlighted the importance of information literacy as well as critical thinking, as essential skills to evaluate the credibility of online information.

The limitations in this review include the use of students as the main participants in most of the research - this would indicate a need to shift the academic focus towards having the general public as participants. This is imperative because anyone who possesses a mobile device is potentially a contributor or distributor of fake news.

For future research, it is suggested that the value of the formal teaching of information literacy at universities be further investigated, as a means to assist students in assessing the credibility of online news. Given the very limited number of studies on the role of critical thinking to identify fake news, this is also an important area for further research.

Contributor Information

Marié Hattingh, Email: [email protected] .

Machdel Matthee, Email: [email protected] .

Hanlie Smuts, Email: [email protected] .

Ilias Pappas, Email: [email protected] .

Yogesh K. Dwivedi, Email: moc.liamg@ideviwdky .

Matti Mäntymäki, Email: [email protected] .

The impact of social media on critical thinking

by Open Minds Foundation | Uncategorized

Social media can be a wonderful thing, but it can also be a tool used to spread misinformation and disinformation by bad actors. With studies showing that around 80% of young people, aged 18 to 24, receive all of their news from social media , it is not surprising that research by YouGov indicates that people who use social media as a news source do not perform as well on the Misinformation Susceptibility Test (MIST) .

People who spend two hours or less of recreational time online each day are twice as likely to be in the highest-scoring category (30% vs. 15%) as people who spend 9 or more hours online per day.

Social media platforms such as X or Facebook, use algorithms to determine the content that is prioritised in your social media feeds. Unfortunately, disinformation and fake news are likely to be more sensational, outrageous, or attention-grabbing so get amplified, drowning out credible information and sources. People act based on the information they are exposed to, so when this information is false or misleading, disastrous results can ensue.

With news spreading quickly, it is difficult to separate fact from fiction in such an emotive and high-tension atmosphere. For example, there is a lot of noise on social media currently around the conflict happening between Israel and Hamas, with Elon Musk sharing accounts described as “ well-known spreaders of disinformation .”

But with social media being an everyday part of many people’s lives, how can you think critically and use it more effectively?

Use the SIFT method:

S: Stop to check for accuracy before you hit share. I: Investigate the source. Is it a reputable news outlet or account? F: Find better coverage. Are multiple outlets sharing the same story, where did this story originate from? T: Trace claims, quotes, and media to their original source

Try inverting the problem

It is also a good idea to deliberately diversify your sources or try the inversion technique .

Inversion thinking encourages us to deliberately approach information in a contrary way. By envisioning an alternative scenario, or ‘playing devil’s advocate’, to actively challenge our biases and finding alternative sources, it makes our reasoning much stronger. It helps us to determine fact from fiction and recognise how our own biases can stand in the way of us thinking critically.

How you can help us combat coercive control

• Developing critical thinking through play
• How individuals can avoid sharing mis- and disinformation
• The Martyr Complex and Conspiracy Theorists
• The global risk of misinformation and disinformation
• How to SCAMPER

Critical Thinking: Finding + Evaluating the Right Information Online: Social Media as a Source

• Introduction
• Fake News and Media Bias
• Social Media as a Source
• Test It Out
• Library 101 This link opens in a new window

There is a huge amount published on social media every single day. It can be hard to separate the good from the bad. This page will help you distinguish genuine, accurate information from that which should not be taken seriously and used in an assignment.     

Can I trust social media as a source?

Is it appropriate to use a tweet, a Facebook post, a TikTok, an Instagram post, or other forms of social media as a source in an assignment?

These sources  can sometimes be used in assignments, but it is important to ensure that the social media accounts that you are consulting are official and reliable. Social media sources should only be used to supplement your main argument, rather than to form the basis of it. This, of course, may be different for visual assignments. For instance, you may be writing an essay on a piece of art that has been posted on Instagram. In this case, it is okay for the social media source to form the foundation for the assignment.  

You can check if a social media post is trustworthy by looking for indicators that the post is from a reliable account. The social media accounts of organisations will usually have a link to the official website in their social media, and conversely also have a link to their official social media on their website. This will help make sure you have the right account. 

Image Source: India.com

It is important to note that the blue checkmark on Twitter no longer indicates that an account is authentic and official. Now, the blue checkmark simply indicates that the user subscribes to Twitter Blue, a paid subscription service that gives them access to additional features on the platform. 

If you are looking for more information on Twitter's profile labels and checkmarks, you might find  this article   helpful. 

Image source: 99 Designs

The SIFT Method

The SIFT method of evaluation may help you to figure out if a source can be used in an assignment. The SIFT method is a four-step process which can be applied to nearly every online source. The steps are as follows: 

STOP:  Stop and consider the source that you are looking at. Does it seem reliable? Is it authentic and unbiased? Who is the author/provider, and do they appear trustworthy? 

INVESTIGATE: Search the web for information about the source.  Try to learn more about the author, the social media account, the organisation, the news outlet, the company, the website or whatever it may be that is providing the source. 

FIND BETTER COVERAGE:  Cross-check your information. If a number of reputable sources have said the same thing as your source, the information is likely trustworthy. In addition, ensure that your source is the most reliable and authoritative source of information on the topic. You may come across a more suitable source while you were carrying out your cross-check. 

TRACE:  Trace all information back to its original source. Information, images, videos and sound recordings may be edited to support a false claim. Finding the original source of the information will provide you with more context and will help to ensure that you are not being misled or deceived by your source.  

Be critical of ALL sources

It is important to be critical of any social media source you use, even when it seems reliable and authoritative at first look. We must remember the context in which sources operate. While they may be reliable and authoritative in one sense, this does not mean they are expert in every field. 

A good example of this is the tweets of former U.S. President Donald Trump in relation to medical issues and advice. On paper, former President Trump hits all of the marks for a reliable source, as he has authority, being the then U.S. President, and he had a verified checkmark on Twitter.

BBC NEWS: Coronavirus: Outcry after Trump suggests injecting disinfectant as treatment .

However, this is when being critical of sources is key. Former President Trump is not a medical professional and has no formal medical training. This illustrates why it is crucial to critically think whether a source is an appropriate authority in a particular context.

POLITICO: Donald Trump is not a doctor. But he plays one on Twitter.

Feedback Poll

We would love feedback if this page was useful to you! If you have additional questions please reach out to us and we can try our best to help.

Social Media and the News

Social media has changed the way we access the news and information. 

Today, many of us get our news from our social media feeds, instead of straight from journalists. The "news" found on social media feeds often takes the form of editorials or opinions about the news. Even worse, the "news" on social media is sometimes based on false or misleading information. 

Adapted from:   Colby-Sawyer College Library  &  Tobias Rose-Stockwell/Medium

The main thing to be aware of when using social media for news is the filter bubble. When we browse and search social media, everyone does not see the same content and search results. Your friend's For You page on TikTok, for example, will be different to your own. Social media feeds use algorithms to show us posts that match up with our opinions and interests. This means we mostly see news articles and content that confirm our own viewpoint and which don't show us the other side or challenge our perspectives. This is what is called the filter bubble.

This video , while over 10 years old, sums up very well why we have to be aware of filter bubbles and the effect they can have.

Contact Us!

Please feel free to contact us about any question you have - about this subject or anything else you need help with. Library staff are available to provide help and answer queries online/remotely and in-person on Level 1 of the Library.

Live chat: www.library.iadt.ie

Email: [email protected]

Instagram: @iadtlibrary

Twitter: @IADTlibrary

• << Previous: Fake News and Media Bias
• Next: Test It Out >>
• Last Updated: Mar 5, 2024 9:40 AM
• URL: https://iadt.libguides.com/findinginfo

Advice | Ask Amy: My girlfriend believes misinformation…

Share this:.

• Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on X (Opens in new window)

Daily e-Edition

Evening e-Edition

• Election 2024
• Restaurants
• Real Estate
• Things To Do

Advice | Ask Amy: My girlfriend believes misinformation on her social media feeds and I’ve had enough

Plus: i can’t believe what’s expected of wedding guests these days.

Advice | Ask Amy: A scolded reader took Amy’s advice about a family situation and regrets it

SUBSCRIBER ONLY

Advice | miss manners: this woman wagged her finger at me because of where i parked. was i wrong.

Advice | Ask Amy: I did my taxes and now I think my husband is cheating on me

Advice | Ask Amy: He wants to go to his brother’s wedding, but dreads seeing his mother