Investigating perceived trust and utility of balanced news chatbots among individuals with varying conspiracy beliefs

Abstract

In the current media landscape, various ideas and narratives gain traction, influenced by the dynamics of selective exposure and a decline in trust in traditional information sources. This trend holds the potential to cultivate polarisation of perspectives, as individuals actively seek information that resonates with their existing attitudes. Hence, diversifying information that is available online can encourage users to engage with multiple perspectives, especially when provided by a trustworthy source. This paper presents findings from two studies which compared individuals with a higher belief in generic conspiracy theories (Study 1; n = 84) and specific conspiracy beliefs on climate change (Study 2; n = 23) to those with lower conspiracy beliefs (nstudy 1 = 93; nstudy 2 = 35) on perceived trustworthiness and usefulness of the so called ‘balanced news chatbots’. These chatbots present a selection of opposing alternative and mainstream perspectives on topics of societal divide like climate change. We found that participants from both groups responded positively to the balanced news chatbot. Trust and perceived usefulness were identified to be key indicators of a positive attitude towards and high intentions of using such a chatbot, corroborating the acceptance of balanced news chatbots as a potential tool to reduce polarisation and conflict, piercing existing information bubbles. In both studies we also found that participants with higher conspiratorial beliefs responded even more positively to the balanced news chatbot than individuals with lower conspiratorial beliefs. We conclude that balanced chatbots are promising as a trusted source of diversified information for individuals with varying levels of conspiracy beliefs.