Search results

Given the rapid growth in efforts on misinformation correction, the study aims to test how evidence type and veracity interact with news agreement on the effectiveness of fact-checking on how well a corrective message discount a false news information.

Experimental participants (N = 511) in Hong Kong were exposed to the same news article and then to a piece of corrective information debunking the news article with variation in the types of evidence (numerical vs narrative) and veracity (no verdict vs half false vs entirely false) in 2019.

Among the participants who disagreed with the news article, numerical fact-checking was more effective than narrative fact-checking in discounting the news article. Some evidence of the backfire effect was found among participants for whom the article was attitude incongruent.

When debunking false information with people exposed to attitude-incongruent news, a milder verdict presented in the form of a half-false scale can prompt a more positive perception of the issue at stake than an entirely false scale, implying that a less certain verdict can help in mitigating the backfire effect compared to a certain verdict.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a transcript of a dialogue among literacy educators and researchers on the impact of generative aritficial intelligence (AI) in the field. In the spring of 2023, a lively conversation emerged on the National Council of Research on Language and Literacy (NCRLL)’s listserv. Stephanie initiated the conversation by sharing an op-ed she wrote for Atlanta Journal-Constitution about the rise of ChatGPT and similar generative AI platforms, moving beyond the general public’s concerns about student cheating and robot takeovers. NCRLL then convened a webinar of eight leading scholars in writing and literacies development, inspired by that listerv conversation and an organizational interest in promoting intergenerational collaboration among literacy scholars.

As former doctoral students of two of the panel participants, webinar facilitators Grace and Victoria positioned themselves primarily as learners about this topic and gathered questions from colleagues, P-16 practitioners and those outside the field of education to assess the concerns and wonderings that ChatGPT and generative AI have raised. The following webinar conversation was recorded on two different days due to scheduling conflicts. It has been merged and edited into one dialogue for coherence and convergence.

Panel participants raise a host of questions and issues that go beyond topics of ethics, morality and basic writing instruction. Furthermore, in dialogue with one another, they describe possibilities for meaningful pedagogy and critical literacy to ensure that generative AI is used for a socially just future for students. While the discussion addressed matters of pedagogy, definitions of literacy and the purpose of (literacy) education, other themes included a critique of capitalism; an interrogation of the systems of power and oppression involved in using generative AI; and the philosophical, ontological, ethical and practical life questions about being human.

This paper provides a glimpse into one of the first panel conversations about ChatGPT and generative AI in the field of literacy. Not only are the panel members respected scholars in the field, they are also former doctoral students and advisors of one another, thus positioning all involved as both learners and teachers of this new technology.

This paper aims to study recent approaches to peacemaking, particularly by Turkey and Russia, in a changing world and their implications for UN-led peace processes. The authors analyze the factors that allow parallel processes to UN mediation to emerge and discuss their influence.

The paper presents two in-depth case studies of mediation in Syria and Libya, where the UN, as well as Russia and Turkey, were actively involved in peacemaking.

The authors find that parallel processes to UN mediation emerge if the UN process does not show progress toward a negotiated settlement and other third parties have leverage over the conflict parties. However, whether these parallel processes pose a fundamental challenge to the UN-led process depends on how sustained the third parties’ leverage over the conflict parties is. If it lasts, it puts the UN in a difficult position to either participate in the parallel process and contain it but thereby also legitimizing it, or to abstain from participating but thereby risking to lose control over the mediation process.

Analyzing different approaches to mediation helps to better understand current dynamics of multiparty mediation, including an increased questioning of the effectiveness of UN mediation, and provides insights on how the UN may adapt to keep its relevance in a changing world.

The paper is based on original first-hand data gathered between 2018 and 2022 through more than 50 interviews with UN officials, negotiation team members, political and civil society actors from Syria and Libya, (former) state officials and experts from Russia and Turkey, as well as external observers.