Sign in

iiinova is part of the Atmosphere — an open, public network where you own your identity.

Xiaoli Nan

@drxnan.bsky.social
98 followers 133 following 5 posts

Professor of Communication Science @UMD | persuasion, health communication, misinformation, AI, media effects

PostsRepliesMedia
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
David Lazer @davidlazer.bsky.social · 29/04/2026
Political campaigns have no idea what's about to hit them www.nytimes.com/2026/04/28/o...
nytimes.com
Opinion | Political Campaigns Have No Idea What’s About to Hit Them
011 1
Xiaoli Nan @drxnan.bsky.social · 25/04/2026
🚨New article from our lab is out!!! The Promise and Limits of Conversational Agents for Misinformation Correction: A Systematic Review of Experimental Evidence www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10....
tandfonline.com
The Promise and Limits of Conversational Agents for Misinformation Correction: A Systematic Review of Experimental Evidence
Conversational agents have been proposed as scalable tools for correcting misinformation, yet empirical findings remain fragmented. This systematic review synthesizes evidence from 15 randomized ex...
000 0
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Ethan Mollick @emollick.bsky.social · 27/02/2026
Cool little experiment: if you subject AI to harsh labor conditions (rejecting work often with no explanation, etc), it slightly, but significantly, changes their “views” on economics - making them more “left”. Whether this is real or roleplaying doesn’t change that agents have alignment drift.
87513 75
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Social Media Lab @socialmedialab.ca · 02/01/2026
"Google AI Overviews put people at risk of harm with misleading health advice" www.theguardian.com/technology/2...
theguardian.com
Google AI Overviews put people at risk of harm with misleading health advice
Exclusive: Inaccurate information presented in summaries, Guardian investigation finds
196 9
Xiaoli Nan @drxnan.bsky.social · 30/09/2025
🚨New research from our lab! Generative AI and misinformation: a scoping review of the role of generative AI in the generation, detection, mitigation, and impact of misinformation link.springer.com/article/10.1...
link.springer.com
Generative AI and misinformation: a scoping review of the role of generative AI in the generation, detection, mitigation, and impact of misinformation - AI & SOCIETY
The rapid advancement of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has introduced both opportunities and challenges in the fight against misinformation. This scoping review synthesizes recent empirical studies to explore the dual role of generative AI—particularly large language models (LLMs)—in the generation, detection, mitigation, and impact of misinformation. Analyzing 24 empirical studies, our review suggests that LLMs can generate highly convincing misinformation, often exploiting cognitive biases and ideological leanings of the audiences, while also demonstrating the ability to detect false claims and enhance users’ resistance to misinformation. Mitigation efforts show mixed results, with personalized corrections proving effective but safeguards inconsistently applied. Additionally, exposure to AI-generated misinformation was found to reduce trust and influence decision-making. This review underscores the need for standardized evaluation metrics, interdisciplinary collaboration, and stronger regulatory measures to ensure the responsible use of generative AI in the information ecosystem.
022 2
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Timothy Caulfield @caulfieldtim.bsky.social · 25/09/2025
WHO joins global health leaders rejecting U.S. acetaminophen warnings www.washingtonpost.com/health/2025/... @who.int: “no conclusive scientific evidence confirming a possible link.” "Public health leaders and organizations around the world have been sounding off..." U.S. become Dark Age Nation
washingtonpost.com
WHO joins global health leaders rejecting U.S. acetaminophen warnings
The World Health Organization is the latest to criticize claims from President Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. linking autism to Tylenol use during pregnancy.
27123 71
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Guy Grossman @guygrossman.bsky.social · 12/05/2025
We are going to miss the days when the GOP official position on vaccines was that it’s “personal choice “
43312 33
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Matthew Facciani @matthewfacciani.bsky.social · 14/04/2025
A new study tested five interventions—including value-based messaging and showcasing conservative scientists—but none increased conservatives’ trust in science, suggesting these attitudes are stable and resistant to brief messaging. www.nature.com/articles/s41... #ScienceSky #SciComm
nature.com
Political ideology and trust in scientists in the USA - Nature Human Behaviour
In this Registered Report, Gligorić et al. find that liberals in the USA tend to have higher trust in most scientists compared with conservatives. However, they find no evidence that a series of inter...
45017 50
Xiaoli Nan @drxnan.bsky.social · 30/03/2025
Just assume we authors will have to deal with not only AI reviewers but also AI editors..and vice versa…
010 1
Xiaoli Nan @drxnan.bsky.social · 30/03/2025
I agree; if AI is used to polish and organize thoughts that’s fine. However it was clear several comments were directly generated by AI focusing on obscure technical issues that a generalist editor is unlikely to know.
110 1
Xiaoli Nan @drxnan.bsky.social · 30/03/2025
We once got a desk reject from a top comm journal and the editor’s comments are clearly AI generated. Is that ethical?
120 2
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Rakoen Maertens @rakoenmaertens.bsky.social · 11/03/2025
|| New Publication (Nature Communications) Psychological Booster Shots Targeting Memory​ Increase Long-Term Resistance Against Misinformation doi.org/10.1038/s414... Press Release www.ox.ac.uk/news/2025-03... Key Findings * Inoculation works * Effects dissipate * Booster shots remedy this (1/10)
59942 99
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Mor Naaman @informor.bsky.social · 16/02/2025
As usual on point from @garymarcus.bsky.social . AI as a persuasion agent is a dangerous tool (Gary gives our work as an example, but there's a lot more, see thread) and our best guess should be that the recent Trump Executive Order on AI Bias does not intend to fix it (or fix AI Bias). Thread 1/
35021 50
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Matthew Facciani @matthewfacciani.bsky.social · 26/01/2025
Instead of directly correcting false claims, “bypassing” offers an alternative strategy: focus on positive, truthful statements about the same topic. New research suggests it can be very effective and I cover it in more detail here! substack.com/home/post/p-... #MisinfoResearch
substack.com
"Bypassing" is a new way to counter misinformation, but how does it work?
A new study found that "bypassing" can counter misinformation without direct confrontation.
16302112 302
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Sander van der Linden @profsanderlinden.bsky.social · 26/01/2025
The spread of misinformation and disinformation top the WEF short-term global risk report for 2025. www.weforum.org/publications...
711158 111
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Stephan Lewandowsky @lewan.uk · 26/01/2025
Juste came across this interesting paper: repetition does not just cause "illusory truth" but also "illusory implications" -- people make inferences on the basis of familiar (illusory) information. @lkfazio.bsky.social @profsanderlinden.bsky.social @ulliecker.bsky.social doi.org/10.1098/rsos...
46919 69
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Kim Doell @kimdoell.bsky.social · 17/01/2025
Our paper "Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries" reached 100 citations today 🤓 (within a year of being published)! Huge thanks to our 258 co-authors. www.science.org/doi/10.1126/...
science.org
Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries
Climate interventions increase beliefs, policy support, and willingness to share information but not higher effort action.
0247 24
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Eric Topol @erictopol.bsky.social · 16/01/2025
This week's cover and editorial @thelancet.bsky.social on mis- and disinformation's impact on public health www.thelancet.com/journals/lan...
623292 232
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Richard Huskey @richardhuskey.bsky.social · 02/01/2025
When it comes to statistical power, how is Communication Science doing? Sun, Shen, Pan, and Quan’s article: “Toward a More Powerful Experimental Communication Science: An Assessment of Two Decades’ Research (2001–2023)” gives an answer. In short, not so good: doi.org/10.1177/0093...
A bar chart displaying the reporting of statistical power analysis by year from 2001 to 2023. The Y-axis shows the percentage of studies per category within each year, ranging from 0% to 75%. The X-axis represents years from 2001 to 2023. The chart is divided into five categories listed on the right: “A Priori,” “Sensitivity,” “Observed,” “Mention Only,” and “No Mention.”

A Priori: Reporting is sparse before 2010 but increases steadily after 2017, peaking near 25% in recent years.

Sensitivity: Reporting is minimal and sporadic across all years.

Observed: Reporting is consistent but moderate, fluctuating around 10–25%.

Mention Only: Reporting is infrequent and fluctuates around 5–10%.

No Mention: Initially dominant but decreases over time, particularly after 2010.

The chart highlights a trend toward increased A Priori power reporting and a decline in studies making no mention of power analysis, indicating evolving research practices over time.Table 2 summarizes the results from power analyses by study design, showing statistical power (median and range) and the percentage of studies at different power levels. The table includes data for four designs: Within-subject (k = 41), Two-group (k = 98), Multi-group (k = 93), and 2 × 2 Factorial (k = 184).

The table shows that within-subject designs generally achieve higher statistical power, especially at larger effect sizes, while two-group and multi-group designs often fall below acceptable power levels, particularly for small effects. 2 × 2 factorial designs vary, with reversal effects showing higher power than attenuation effects. Overall, achieving adequate power remains a challenge in many designs, highlighting the need for careful study planning.
1175 17
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Jay Van Bavel, PhD @jayvanbavel.bsky.social · 02/01/2025
We have a new paper explaining all the ways you can use natural language processing to analyze text data in @natrevpsych.bsky.social We provide user friendly recommendations for using NLP to ensure rigour and reproducibility Here is a free link: www.nature.com/articles/s44...
414653 146
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Helen Branswell 🇨🇦 @helenbranswell.bsky.social · 26/12/2024
What lies ahead in global health in 2025? I can't tell you if #H5N1 #birdflu is going to trigger a pandemic, but I can tell you a few things I'm going to be watching in the new year. www.statnews.com/2024/12/26/g...
statnews.com
Three issues to watch in global health in 2025
Three issues to watch in global health in 2025: H5N1 bird flu, mpox, and U.S. influence on the global stage.
12234112 234
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Jay Van Bavel, PhD @jayvanbavel.bsky.social · 23/12/2024
This is consistent with a review of 747 COVID papers we published in @nature.com finding that evidence for social science and behavior claims during COVID as very high (16/18 claims were supported) and this research was highly rigorrous (average N= 16,848) www.nature.com/articles/s41...
nature.com
A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19 - Nature
Evaluation of evidence generated to test 19 proposed policy recommendations and guidance for the future.
3329 32
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Brian Nosek @briannosek.bsky.social · 23/12/2024
New in NHB: An appetizer from the SCORE project. We replicated 29 social science COVID papers. Beginners and more experienced researchers forecasted the replication outcomes following a structured elicitation process and were similarly successful at prediction, ~65%. www.nature.com/articles/s41...
24819 48
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Carl T. Bergstrom @carlbergstrom.com · 22/12/2024
We wrote about this at some length in our paper "Misinformation in and about science". www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/...
In addition, researchers commonly misstate or overstate the implications of their work (35). In concert with researchers, university press offices play a particularly important role in communicating science—but too frequently do so in ways that prioritize web traffic over accuracy. Sometimes spin is carried over from the journal article itself (36); other times, it is added in the press release. A biomedical report might omit important caveats, draw inappropriate extrapolations from mouse models, and exaggerate prescriptive implications. One analysis found that nearly a third of 525 papers in top obesity or nutrition journals make inappropriate causal claims in their abstracts or titles (37); in another study, roughly the same fraction of health-related papers widely shared on social media used inappropriately strong causal language (38). Some fields may be more prone to hype than others. A new result on the geometry of Banach spaces may be more difficult to hype than a bioweapon claim, but we surmise that most fields are susceptible.
Much of this truth bending may be unnecessary. Most studies (39–41) fail to find an association between exaggeration and uptake by the news media. Admittedly, selection bias may play a role: perhaps the stories that are not exaggerated are those that do not need to be. In any case, high-quality press releases appear to drive higher-quality news stories on that research (42, 43).
15810 58
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Lisa Fazio @lkfazio.bsky.social · 19/12/2024
Out now - National Academies consensus report on Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science 🧪 It was a privilege to serve as one of the 15 committee members from a wide range of scientific disciplines who put this report together. Quick 🧵1/ www.nationalacademies.org/our-work/und...
Cover of the report - it's in a blue/purple color scheme and shows an abstract illustration of a molecule and the title of the report "Understanding and Addressing Misinformation About Science Consensus Study Report"
18449172 449
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Mikey Biddlestone @mikeybiddlestone.bsky.social · 17/12/2024
🚨Our meta-analysis of the motives associated with conspiracy beliefs has been accepted at Psychological Bulletin!🚨“Reasons to believe: A systematic review and meta-analytic synthesis of the motives associated with conspiracy beliefs” osf.io/preprints/ps... 🧵👇 1/16
Abstract for our accepted pre-print of Reasons to believe: A systematic review and meta-analytic synthesis of the motives associated with conspiracy beliefs
35121 51
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Christopher Barrie @cbarrie.bsky.social · 17/12/2024
Pleased to share the latest version of my paper with Arthur Spirling and @lexipalmer.bsky.social on replication using LMs We show: 1. current applications of LMs in political science research *don't* meet basic standards of reproducibility...
18435163 435
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Matthew Facciani @matthewfacciani.bsky.social · 17/12/2024
Conspiracy theory believers who interacted with an AI chatbot that asked them to reflect on the uncertainties of their beliefs had significantly less conviction in their conspiracy theory beliefs. misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu/article/usin... #MisinfoResearch
misinforeview.hks.harvard.edu
Using an AI-powered “street epistemologist” chatbot and reflection tasks to diminish conspiracy theory beliefs | HKS Misinformation Review
Social scientists, journalists, and policymakers are increasingly interested in methods to mitigate or reverse the public’s beliefs in conspiracy theories, particularly those associated with negative ...
3185 18
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
David Rand @dgrand.bsky.social · 16/12/2024
🚨In Science🚨 Conspiracy beliefs famously resist correction, ya? WRONG: We show brief convos w GPT4 reduce conspiracy beliefs by ~20%! -Lasts over 2mo -Works on entrenched beliefs -Tailored AI response rebuts specific evidence offered by believers www.science.org/doi/10.1126/... 1/ [X->BSky repost]
2128992 289
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Sander van der Linden @profsanderlinden.bsky.social · 16/12/2024
In this new article in American Psychologist we respond to critics in detail and clarify two key points for the field; (1) The prevalence of misinformation in society is substantial when properly defined. (2) Misinformation causally impacts attitudes and behaviors. psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/202...
44877281 877
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
mark brandt @mjbsp.bsky.social · 15/12/2024
Yup! go.bsky.app/J4gmGmV
1103 10
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
koenfucius @koenfucius.bsky.social · 15/12/2024
Research by @dbroockman.bsky.social et al suggests •experienced political practitioners and laypeople perform barely better than chance at predicting which messages will be most persuasive •practitioners’ predictions are not meaningfully better than laypeople’s: buff.ly/3OU7rrB
1199 19
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Matt Grossmann @mattgrossmann.bsky.social · 14/12/2024
people are good at discerning true from false information but partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive & strong; skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to false info journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10....
journals.sagepub.com
Sage Journals: Discover world-class research
Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher.
0218 21
Reposted by Xiaoli Nan
Kai Kupferschmidt @kakape.bsky.social · 14/12/2024
Sadly, it’s a good time to once again share this amazing infographic that we ran at @science.org more than 7 years ago 🧪 #IDsky www.science.org/content/arti...
science.org
Here's the visual proof of why vaccines do more good than harm
See year by year how vaccines beat back nine dangerous infectious diseases
226100263722 10K