Your Daily digest for PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

[Article Digests for Psychology & Social Work]

PsyPost – Psychology News Daily Digest (Unofficial)

 

(https://www.psypost.org/social-anxiety-can-diminish-prosocial-motivation-study-finds/) Social anxiety can diminish prosocial motivation, study finds
Mar 10th 2025, 10:00

A study conducted in China found that individuals with pronounced social anxiety tend to be less motivated to engage in prosocial behaviors when these require effort. However, this effect was only observed in tasks where socially anxious individuals were expected to gain something for another person. In contrast, when the goal was to prevent a loss for someone else, there was no difference between participants with high and low social anxiety. The research was published in the (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100533) International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology.
Social anxiety is characterized by an intense fear of being judged, embarrassed, or negatively evaluated in social situations. People with social anxiety often avoid social interactions or endure them with significant distress. Situations that commonly trigger social anxiety include public speaking, meeting new people, or performing tasks while being observed.
Individuals with social anxiety may also experience physical symptoms such as sweating, trembling, a racing heart, or nausea. This condition can interfere with daily life, making it difficult to form relationships, succeed at work, or participate in social activities. Social anxiety typically develops during adolescence and, if left untreated, can persist into adulthood.
Study author Ye Yang and his colleagues sought to explore the prosocial behaviors of highly socially anxious individuals and compare them to those of individuals with low social anxiety. Previous research has suggested that people with high social anxiety are less likely to engage in prosocial behaviors. For example, they are less inclined to volunteer for tasks that benefit others and tend to be less generous in economic games.
These tendencies may stem from a fear of negative evaluation, rejection, and embarrassment when interacting with others. Their heightened self-consciousness and avoidance behaviors make it difficult for them to initiate or participate in helping actions, even when they have the desire to do so. Based on this, the study authors hypothesized that highly socially anxious individuals would be less willing to engage in prosocial behaviors in public settings. However, they predicted no significant difference between socially anxious and non-anxious individuals when prosocial behaviors occurred in private contexts.
The researchers conducted two experiments. In the first experiment, 37 university students with high social anxiety and 36 with low social anxiety participated. Their average age was around 20 years. Each participant completed two blocks of 80 trials designed to measure prosocial behavior. One block took place in a private setting (i.e., the participant was alone in a room wearing headphones), while the other was conducted in a public setting, where two observers (one male and one female) were present, and audio feedback was provided through speakers instead of headphones.
Within each block, half of the trials required participants to exert effort for personal gain, while the other half required effort to benefit another person (who was fictional, though participants were unaware of this). The effort-based task involved repeatedly pressing the “Q” key on a keyboard as quickly as possible within a five-second window to earn increased monetary rewards, with the number of key presses determining the payout. Participants could either accept a default outcome, which required no effort, or engage in the key-pressing task. The number of key presses was recorded as an indicator of effort. During these tasks, participants wore an electroencephalography (EEG) device.
The same participants took part in a second experiment with a similar procedure. However, instead of gaining rewards, the task focused on preventing losses. If participants chose not to exert effort, they would incur a 90-cent loss, either for themselves or for another person, depending on the trial. If they chose to exert effort—by pressing the “Q” key as many times as possible within five seconds—the loss could be reduced by up to 10 cents if they were successful.
The first experiment revealed that participants with high social anxiety were more likely to exert effort for themselves than for others. In contrast, those with low social anxiety exerted effort equally in both scenarios. However, when exerting effort, low-anxiety participants were more successful at securing gains for themselves than for others. Meanwhile, participants with high social anxiety performed equally well when securing gains for themselves and for others.
The second experiment showed that all participants were more willing to exert effort to prevent their own losses than to prevent losses for others. However, unlike in the first experiment, there were no significant differences between participants with high and low social anxiety in the amount of effort they expended to avoid loss. Additionally, the public versus private context had no effect on behavior in either experiment.
“While social anxiety diminishes individual prosocial behavior, evaluative anxiety and sensitive action goals can mitigate its impact to some extent. These findings are critical for developing strategies to enhance psychological health and promote healthier social interactions,” the study authors concluded.
The study sheds light on the links between social anxiety and prosocial behaviors. However, it is important to note that the study involved relatively small monetary gains and losses, minimal effort requirements, and fictional beneficiaries of prosocial behavior. If the stakes had been higher—such as requiring greater effort or involving real individuals known to the participants—the results might have been different.
The paper, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2024.100533) Social anxiety undermines prosocial behaviors when required effort,” was authored by Ye Yang, Yan Zhou, Huijuan Zhang, Hui Kou, Jia Zhao, Jiangli Tian, and Cheng Guo.

(https://www.psypost.org/caffeine-may-help-rugby-players-sustain-activity-and-agility-in-multi-day-tournaments/) Caffeine may help rugby players sustain activity and agility in multi-day tournaments
Mar 10th 2025, 08:00

New research published in the (https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15502783.2024.2441763) Journal of the International Society of Sports Nutrition suggests that caffeine supplementation may help male collegiate rugby sevens players sustain their activity levels and improve agility during two-day tournaments. Players who consumed caffeine before matches covered more distance at jogging speeds in the final match, while those without caffeine tended to slow down, spending more time standing and walking. The study also found that caffeine improved players’ reactive agility on the second day, suggesting a potential role in reducing fatigue-related declines in performance.
Rugby sevens is an intense sport that requires repeated bursts of high-speed running, rapid changes in direction, and physical contact, all within a tournament format that demands multiple matches over two consecutive days. Given these physical and psychological demands, researchers have explored different strategies to help athletes maintain performance and recover effectively.
Caffeine is one of the most widely used performance-enhancing substances in sports. Previous studies have shown that caffeine can improve endurance, power output, and sprint performance in team sports. However, most research has focused on single matches rather than tournaments spanning multiple days.
“Rugby sevens is an official competition in the Asian Games and the Olympics. It is also popular in worldwide tours. Rugby sevens requires high-intensity efforts and quick recovery between matches,” explained lead author (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Chen-Kang-Chang) Chen-Kang Chang, a professor of sport performance at the National Taiwan University of Sport.
“A tournament usually includes four to seven matches in two consecutive days, which places high physiological and psychological demands on players. As a sports scientist, we try to find ways, including supplements, to facilitate performance and recovery. As an active rugby player, this topic fits well with my work and passion for this sport.”
The study used a double-blind, randomized crossover design, meaning neither the participants nor the researchers knew who was receiving caffeine or a placebo during each trial. Eight collegiate male rugby players were recruited, with six completing the full study. Each player participated in two tournaments, one with caffeine supplementation and one with a placebo, with a 13-day break in between.
Players consumed 3 mg of caffeine per kilogram of body weight 60 minutes before each match during the caffeine trial. In the placebo trial, they received an identical-looking capsule containing starch. Both trials followed the same structured diet, hydration plan, and match schedule to minimize differences outside of caffeine intake.
Each tournament involved four matches over two days, with two matches per day. Players wore GPS tracking devices to measure their movement patterns, including total distance covered, time spent at different speeds, acceleration, deceleration, and collisions. Before each match, a reactive agility test was conducted to assess their ability to change direction quickly in response to an unpredictable stimulus.
The study’s key finding was that caffeine supplementation influenced how players distributed their physical effort across the tournament. On the second day, players who consumed caffeine before their final match spent less time standing and walking and more time jogging (6–12 km/h), whereas players in the placebo trial showed the opposite trend. This suggests that caffeine helped sustain players’ ability to engage in moderate-intensity activity when fatigue typically sets in.
The results also showed that caffeine enhanced reactive agility before the first match on the second day. Players in the caffeine trial responded faster in the agility test compared to those in the placebo trial, potentially giving them a competitive edge in real-game situations that require quick decision-making and rapid directional changes.
“For average rugby players, consuming supplements or drinks that contain 3 mg/kg body weight of caffeine before matches may help performance, especially in multiple competitions over one or two days,” Chang told PsyPost. “For the average person who is interested in other sports, caffeine has been shown to improve performance in endurance or short-term high-intensity exercise.”
Interestingly, caffeine did not significantly affect high-intensity efforts such as sprinting, collisions, or repeated bursts of acceleration and deceleration. This indicates that while caffeine helped players stay more active during lower-intensity periods, it did not directly increase their ability to perform the most physically demanding actions of the game.
“We hypothesized that caffeine could improve distance in high-speed ranges such as 18–20 km/h or greater than 20 km/h,” Chang noted. “Instead, the results showed that the differences were in walking and jogging. We were a little disappointed that caffeine had no effect on acceleration, deceleration, or collisions.”
As with all research, there are some limitations. The sample size was small due to the nature of rugby sevens, where each match involves a limited number of players. Additionally, movement patterns can be influenced by tactical decisions, errors, and game dynamics, making it difficult to isolate the effects of caffeine from other factors.
Future research should focus on larger sample sizes, particularly among elite players in international competitions. Long-term studies could also track caffeine’s effects across a full season, especially when athletes travel across multiple time zones. Another area of interest is whether substituted players, who play fewer minutes, can benefit from caffeine in the same way as those who play full matches.
“We hope to collect data from elite rugby players with larger sample sizes, preferably in international competitions,” Chang explained. “Long-term monitoring of elite players across a competitive season, especially when they have to travel across multiple time zones within weeks, should make the findings more applicable to real competitions. We would also like to investigate whether substituted players, who play fewer minutes in a match, can benefit from caffeine supplementation.”
“Field studies like this have limitations compared to lab-based controlled exercise performance evaluations. The results can vary match by match, making them difficult to interpret. However, this design more closely reflects real match competitions.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1080/15502783.2024.2441763) Caffeine supplementation improved movement patterns and reactive agility in rugby sevens matches in male collegiate players,” was authored by Chang-Li Hsueh, Cheng-Yen Sun, and Chen-Kang Chang.

(https://www.psypost.org/are-online-quizzes-secretly-changing-your-vote-surprising-study-uncovers-an-opinion-matching-effect/) Are online quizzes secretly changing your vote? Surprising study uncovers an “opinion matching effect”
Mar 10th 2025, 06:00

A new study published in (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309897) PLOS One suggests that online quizzes designed to help people determine their political alignment may be influencing their opinions and voting preferences without their knowledge. Researchers found that some of these quizzes, which claim to match users with political candidates or parties based on their responses, produce biased results that favor one side over another. In an experiment with eligible United States voters, the study showed that such biased recommendations could significantly sway voting preferences—all while participants remained unaware of any manipulation.
The internet has introduced powerful new methods of influence, some of which can shape public opinion and decision-making in ways that users do not consciously recognize. Political quizzes that match users to candidates or parties have become a popular feature on various websites, promising to help voters make informed choices. However, if the algorithms behind these quizzes are designed in a biased way—either intentionally or inadvertently—they could be subtly steering people toward a particular political preference.
Robert Epstein of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and his colleagues wanted to investigate whether such bias exists in real-world quizzes and whether a controlled experiment could demonstrate how these quizzes influence voter preferences. They were also interested in whether participants would notice any manipulation or if the effect would remain undetected.
The researchers first conducted a study to examine whether political quizzes available online produced results that systematically favored certain political parties or ideologies. To do this, they used automated scripts to simulate users taking these quizzes multiple times. These simulated users selected their responses randomly, ensuring that no specific political preference was reflected in their answers. The expectation was that if a quiz were truly neutral, its recommendations would be evenly distributed among all possible political affiliations over many trials.
The results of this analysis revealed significant bias in some of the quizzes. One quiz, hosted by a website called My Political Personality, was designed to match users with one of four political parties: Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, or Green. If the quiz were unbiased, each party should have been recommended roughly an equal number of times. However, the researchers found that the quiz disproportionately recommended the Democratic Party at twice the expected rate while never recommending the Green Party at all.
Another quiz, hosted by the well-known Pew Research Center, claimed to classify users into one of nine political categories based on their answers. However, the researchers found that some categories were recommended far more often than others. Most notably, users were never categorized as “Progressive Left,” even after hundreds of trials. The researchers concluded that these quizzes, whether intentionally or unintentionally, contained statistical biases that could subtly influence the political opinions of users who took them.
For their second study, the researchers conducted a controlled experiment to determine whether a biased political quiz could actually shift voting preferences. They recruited 773 eligible voters in the United States and randomly assigned them to different groups. Participants were first asked about their opinions of two Australian political candidates, Scott Morrison and Bill Shorten. Because these candidates were not well known in the United States, participants were unlikely to have strong preexisting opinions about them, making them ideal subjects for testing the influence of a biased quiz.
After providing their initial opinions, participants completed a political quiz that was designed to appear as though it would match them with the candidate who best aligned with their views. However, the results of the quiz were manipulated: some participants were falsely told that they strongly matched with Morrison, while others were told they strongly matched with Shorten. A control group received neutral results, with both candidates being presented as equally compatible.
After taking the quiz and receiving manipulated results, participants were asked again about their voting preferences. The researchers found that the number of participants who said they would vote for the quiz’s favored candidate increased dramatically—by as much as 95% in some groups. This means that participants who initially had no preference for either candidate became significantly more likely to support the candidate they were told was the best match for them.
Interestingly, while voting preferences shifted substantially, participants’ general opinions about the candidates changed only slightly. This suggests that the quiz primarily influenced voting decisions rather than deeply held beliefs. Perhaps most notably, none of the participants who had been given biased results reported any awareness of manipulation. This indicated that the effect operated beneath the level of conscious awareness, making it a powerful yet invisible tool for shaping voter behavior.
The researchers coined the term opinion matching effect to describe this phenomenon, in which individuals are more likely to align with a candidate or party when they are told their views match—even if that match is fabricated or manipulated.
They emphasize that this form of influence differs from other methods of online persuasion because it occurs in a setting where users expect to receive objective, personalized guidance. Unlike traditional political advertisements or campaign messages, which people often approach with skepticism, opinion-matching quizzes present themselves as neutral tools for self-discovery. As a result, users may be more trusting of the recommendations they receive, making them particularly susceptible to the subtle nudging of biased results.
While the findings highlight a powerful and largely invisible form of influence, the study has some limitations. The researchers focused on short-term shifts in voting preferences, but it remains unclear how long these effects last. If someone takes a biased quiz months before an election, their views may revert over time. However, if a voter encounters such a quiz shortly before casting their ballot, the effect could have a more immediate impact.
Epstein and his colleagues concluded their study with a harrowing warning: “we hope this study will serve as a reminder to scientists, public policy makers, and interested members of the general public that the internet is very much out of control. The content of print media has been constrained in various ways since not long after the printing press was invented, but there are still virtually no constraints on the kind of content that can be posted online.”
“This means, among other things, that new means of manipulation that the internet has made possible can be used, and almost certainly are being used, to impact the thinking and behavior of billions of people in potentially destructive or self-destructive ways without their knowledge or consent. [The opinion matching effect matters] because it is a powerful tool for shifting people’s opinions and voting preferences which appears to be completely invisible to users. If we can discover this, so can bad actors.”
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0309897) The “opinion matching effect” (OME): A subtle but powerful new form of influence that is apparently being used on the internet,” was authored by Robert Epstein, Yunyi Huang, Miles Megerdoomian, and Vanessa R. Zankich.

(https://www.psypost.org/new-psychology-study-shows-how-a-dark-trait-predicts-a-disturbing-kind-of-pleasure/) New psychology study shows how a dark trait predicts a disturbing kind of pleasure
Mar 9th 2025, 17:00

A new psychological study has found that some people experience genuine pleasure from causing harm to others, and that this enjoyment is strongly linked to psychopathic personality traits. Published in the (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101963) Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, the research explored how dark personality traits influence sadistic pleasure. The findings suggest that while sadism is present in varying degrees across the general population, those with high levels of psychopathy—especially the emotionally detached trait known as coldheartedness—are most likely to take pleasure in cruelty.
While sadism has long been associated with sexual behavior and criminal violence, recent research suggests that everyday sadism—deriving pleasure from inflicting pain in non-sexual and socially acceptable ways—exists among the general population. This can be seen in the enjoyment of violent media, competitive aggression, or cruelty in online interactions. However, the psychological traits that contribute to such behavior remain unclear.
Researchers have previously explored how personality traits like narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—collectively known as the Dark Triad—relate to sadistic tendencies. Among these, psychopathy has consistently shown the strongest link. But psychopathy itself is a complex personality trait with multiple dimensions, including impulsivity, emotional detachment, and manipulativeness. The researchers wanted to investigate which aspects of psychopathy were most strongly tied to sadistic pleasure.
Additionally, much of the previous research on sadism has relied on self-reported tendencies rather than directly measuring behavior. The new study sought to bridge that gap by using real-life behavioral tasks to observe how individuals respond to opportunities to cause harm.
To assess sadistic pleasure, the researchers recruited 120 participants between the ages of 18 and 55 from the general public and student population in Maastricht, Netherlands. Participants were asked to complete personality assessments measuring traits associated with the Dark Triad, as well as psychopathy subtraits such as impulsivity and coldheartedness.
The study involved two behavioral tasks designed to measure sadistic pleasure. In one task, participants were asked to “exterminate” pill bugs by placing them into what they believed to be a functioning grinder. In reality, the bugs were unharmed, but the participants were led to believe they were crushing them. In the second task, participants were given control over a noise blast that could be administered to another person, who was actually an actor in a pre-recorded video. The participants believed they were disrupting the other person’s performance in a game by blasting them with loud, unpleasant sounds.
Throughout the experiment, the researchers recorded the number of bugs participants chose to “grind” and the number of noise blasts they administered. Participants were also asked how much enjoyment they felt after completing each task.
The results showed that all three Dark Triad traits—narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy—were positively associated with self-reported sadistic tendencies. However, when looking at actual behavior, psychopathy was the strongest predictor of sadistic pleasure.
The researchers further broke down psychopathy into its core components and found that coldheartedness was the most relevant trait. Participants with higher coldheartedness scores reported greater enjoyment from the bug-grinding task. This suggests that those who lack emotional concern for others are more likely to find pleasure in causing irreversible harm.
Interestingly, while coldheartedness was linked to enjoyment of bug grinding, it did not predict the number of bugs participants actually chose to grind. Similarly, while psychopathy was linked to general sadistic tendencies, it did not strongly predict actual participation in the noise-blasting task. This indicates that while individuals with psychopathic traits may enjoy cruelty, their engagement in harmful behavior might depend on other factors, such as situational constraints or personal motivations.
Another notable finding was that narcissism was negatively associated with noise blasting. This suggests that narcissistic individuals, despite their perceived self-importance, may be reluctant to engage in direct acts of harm unless provoked. This aligns with previous research indicating that narcissists tend to react aggressively only when their ego is threatened.
The findings provide further evidence that everyday sadism exists on a spectrum, rather than being confined to a small, criminal subset of the population. While only 11% of participants reported increased pleasure after grinding bugs, and 20% after blasting noise, the fact that these behaviors occurred at all suggests that many people have at least some capacity for deriving pleasure from harming others.
But as with all research, there are some limitations to consider. The sample was composed mostly of students, with a majority being female. Previous research suggests that men are generally more likely to display psychopathic and sadistic tendencies, so the findings may not be fully representative of the broader population. Future studies should include a more diverse sample to examine whether these patterns hold across different demographics.
Future research could also explore how other personality traits, beyond the Dark Triad, influence sadistic pleasure. Traits associated with Cluster B personality disorders, such as borderline or antisocial traits, may play a role. Environmental factors, such as upbringing and exposure to violence, could also be investigated to understand the development of sadistic tendencies over time.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2024.101963) Those who (enjoy to) hurt: The influence of dark personality traits on animal- and human directed sadistic pleasure,” was authored by Jill Lobbestael, Franziska Wolf, Mario Gollwitzer, and Roy F. Baumeister.

(https://www.psypost.org/coffee-does-not-significantly-impact-balance-or-physical-function-in-older-adults/) Coffee does not significantly impact balance or physical function in older adults
Mar 9th 2025, 16:00

A recent study published in (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2024.112592) Experimental Gerontology investigated whether consuming coffee affects balance and physical function in older adults. Drinking a strong cup of coffee had minimal effects on postural control and functional performance. While caffeinated coffee slightly influenced balance complexity and postural strategy, it did not lead to significant changes in stability or movement ability. These findings suggest that older adults can continue to enjoy coffee without concern that it will impair their ability to maintain balance or perform daily physical activities.
As people age, they experience a natural decline in muscle strength, coordination, and balance, increasing their risk of falling. Falls are a major health concern, leading to injuries, hospitalizations, and reduced independence. While caffeine is widely known to enhance physical performance by stimulating the nervous system, previous research has suggested that consuming caffeine in high doses may negatively affect postural stability, potentially increasing fall risk.
Most studies examining caffeine’s effects on balance have used caffeine in pill form, which does not account for the other compounds present in coffee. Coffee contains a complex mixture of over a thousand compounds, including polyphenols, lipids, and minerals, which could interact with caffeine and influence its effects on the body. Given that coffee is one of the most commonly consumed beverages among older adults, researchers wanted to determine whether coffee consumption affects balance differently than pure caffeine and whether it has any impact on physical function.
The study involved 22 healthy older adults (12 men and 10 women) with an average age of 68 years. Participants completed four separate testing sessions under different conditions: consuming caffeinated coffee, drinking decaffeinated coffee, taking a placebo beverage, or consuming no fluid at all. The caffeinated coffee contained a caffeine dose of 3 milligrams per kilogram of body weight—equivalent to a strong cup of coffee.
Participants underwent a series of balance tests to measure postural control. They stood on a force platform under different conditions, such as standing with eyes open or closed and standing on firm or soft surfaces. Researchers recorded movements of the body’s center of pressure, a key measure of balance stability. They also assessed physical function using standardized fitness tests, including chair stands, arm curls, a timed walking test, and a step test.
To ensure the results were not influenced by participants’ expectations, the researchers used a double-blind, randomized crossover design. This meant that neither the participants nor the researchers knew which beverage was being consumed during each session.
Overall, the study found that drinking coffee had little impact on balance performance or physical function. Participants who consumed caffeinated coffee did not show significant differences in their ability to maintain balance compared to those who drank decaffeinated coffee, the placebo, or had no fluid.
One notable finding was that caffeinated coffee slightly increased the frequency of small balance adjustments compared to decaffeinated coffee. This suggests that participants made more frequent but minor postural corrections when standing, potentially indicating a change in balance strategy. However, these changes did not translate into measurable improvements or impairments in overall stability.
Similarly, caffeinated coffee did not improve or hinder performance in any of the physical function tests. Participants performed just as well in chair stands, arm curls, and walking tests regardless of which beverage they consumed. This suggests that a single dose of coffee does not provide a short-term boost to physical performance in older adults.
While the study provides valuable insights, it has some limitations. The participants were relatively healthy and physically active, meaning the results may not apply to older adults with balance impairments or mobility issues. Future research should examine whether coffee affects balance differently in individuals with a higher risk of falls.
Additionally, the caffeine dose used in this study was moderate. It is possible that higher doses of caffeine could have stronger effects on balance and physical function. Further studies could explore whether larger amounts of caffeine or different types of coffee have different impacts on postural control.
Finally, while the researchers measured balance using precise force platform techniques, they did not test real-world scenarios, such as walking on uneven surfaces or responding to sudden movements. Future research could investigate how coffee affects balance and movement in dynamic environments.
The study, “(https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2024.112592) The acute effects of coffee ingestion on postural control and physical function in older adults: A randomised crossover trial,” was authored by Darren L. Richardson, Matt Hill, Jason Tallis, Lucas Guimaraes Ferreira, and Neil D. Clarke.

(https://www.psypost.org/media-coverage-of-artificial-intelligence-split-along-political-lines-study-finds/) Media coverage of artificial intelligence split along political lines, study finds
Mar 9th 2025, 12:00

A recent study published in (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/08944393241268526) Social Science Computer Review finds that South Korea’s conservative and progressive newspapers frame artificial intelligence issues differently, reflecting their distinct ideological orientations. Conservative outlets tend to emphasize the benefits and advancements associated with artificial intelligence, while progressive media more frequently highlight ethical concerns and risks. These different portrayals influence public understanding and have implications for policy discussions about artificial intelligence.
The study was conducted due to growing public and political interest in artificial intelligence technology. As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly prominent in our daily lives, understanding how the media present these issues is important. Media coverage shapes public opinion and influences how society approaches technology, as well as affecting government policy decisions.
Given South Korea’s global leadership in technological innovation and its politically polarized media landscape, researchers recognized an opportunity to explore how media partisanship influences the presentation of artificial intelligence news. The research team aimed to identify how conservative and progressive newspapers differ in their framing of artificial intelligence topics, hoping to offer insights into the wider societal implications of these differences.
To conduct her analysis, Mikyung Chang from Korea University examined articles published by two of South Korea’s most prominent newspapers, each representing a distinct political ideology. They selected Chosun Ilbo, representing conservative viewpoints, and Hankyoreh, known for progressive perspectives. Chang collected 684 articles published from November 30, 2022, to June 30, 2023, focusing on topics related to artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT and generative artificial intelligence. The date was significant as it marked the public introduction of ChatGPT, sparking heightened interest and debate around artificial intelligence.
After eliminating articles unrelated or minimally related to artificial intelligence, Chang narrowed the sample down to 584 articles for detailed analysis. Two trained coders independently analyzed each article, categorizing them according to two main value frames: a “development” frame, which emphasizes positive aspects like economic growth, technological progress, and quality-of-life improvements, and a “crisis” frame, highlighting ethical concerns, risks, and potential negative impacts. Chang ensured accuracy through detailed coding criteria and verification of consistency between coders.
The analysis revealed clear differences in how South Korea’s conservative and progressive newspapers covered artificial intelligence. Conservative media, exemplified by Chosun Ilbo, predominantly used the “development” frame. They emphasized artificial intelligence’s positive aspects, highlighting how technological advancements can lead to economic growth, improved quality of life, and enhanced competitiveness.
Conservative newspapers often portrayed artificial intelligence as a promising opportunity, pointing out its potential to drive economic growth, enhance productivity, and improve healthcare and education. For instance, articles emphasized how generative artificial intelligence could significantly boost economic output, create new business models, and foster innovation beneficial to society as a whole.
In contrast, the progressive media, represented by Hankyoreh, were more likely to use the crisis frame. Progressive coverage frequently addressed the ethical, social, and legal concerns surrounding artificial intelligence. Issues such as privacy risks, job displacement, ethical dilemmas, and the dangers of misinformation and manipulation were common themes.
Articles often discussed the potential for artificial intelligence-generated fake news and privacy violations, along with job displacement resulting from automation and generative artificial intelligence. The progressive media also highlighted concerns over increasing dependence on artificial intelligence and called for societal preparation and appropriate regulations.
The difference in coverage approaches between conservative and progressive outlets reflects deeper societal and ideological priorities. Conservative media appear inclined toward maintaining public optimism, supporting the notion of technological advancement and economic prosperity. Progressive media, conversely, emphasize caution, responsibility, and the need to address potential ethical and social problems. This division in media framing indicates distinct goals for public debate—conservatives prioritize technological progress, while progressives focus on equitable development and the prevention of potential negative consequences.
Chang emphasized that such framing shapes how citizens perceive artificial intelligence, influencing whether they view these technologies as beneficial or harmful. By highlighting specific aspects, media frames can shape public opinion and influence how society and policymakers respond to technological innovations.
“This research provides a broad understanding of how media shape public opinion on new technologies and can inspire future studies to investigate whether partisan characteristics and patterns in AI reporting are present in other technologically advanced nations and how they influence public perceptions and behavioral intentions,” she concluded. “By exploring media framing of AI issues in various geopolitical contexts, such research could enhance our comprehension of global AI discourse and aid in devising strategies for addressing social and ethical issues related to AI. It can also contribute to the development of global regulatory guidelines and policies through effective science communication strategies.”
The new findings are in line with research conducted in the United States. A (https://www.psypost.org/liberal-media-outlets-display-a-higher-aversion-to-artificial-intelligence-than-conservative-media-study-finds/) 2023 study found that liberal-leaning media outlets express more negative sentiments toward artificial intelligence compared to conservative-leaning outlets, primarily due to concerns over AI’s potential to reinforce societal biases. This partisan divide in AI coverage persisted even after accounting for factors like analytical depth and authenticity.
The new study, “(https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393241268526) Does the Media’s Partisanship Influence News Coverage on Artificial Intelligence Issues? Media Coverage Analysis on Artificial Intelligence Issues,” was published September 2, 2024.

Forwarded by:
Michael Reeder LCPC
Baltimore, MD

This information is taken from free public RSS feeds published by each organization for the purpose of public distribution. Readers are linked back to the article content on each organization's website. This email is an unaffiliated unofficial redistribution of this freely provided content from the publishers. 

 

(#) unsubscribe from this feed
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.clinicians-exchange.org/pipermail/article-digests-clinicians-exchange.org/attachments/20250310/86295388/attachment.htm>