Publications

Rethinking digital justice download

In: Un sistema penal humanista y resocializador: Libro homenaje al profesor José Luis de la Cuesta Arzamendi, Agencia Estatal Boletín Ofcial del Estado, 2026, pp: 2361-2373, ISBN: 978-84-340-3153-1

Abstract

Digital technology redefines the way that justice is delivered and received. This observation led to a number of insights on how to describe this still developing field of what is often referred to as digital justice. But what exactly is digital justice? What is included and what is not? Academic literature and policy documents have dealt with digital justice in both civil and criminal justice by roughly using two approaches: a more restrictive approach using technology and the focal point and a wider approach using technology as the starting point for a further analysis of its impact on human rights. Both approaches have their merits. Yet, since the topic of digitalisation and justice is an ever-evolving theme, it is necessary to study what both approaches consist of and whether they stand the test of time. For that reason, this paper first unpacks how academia and policy have defined digital justice thus far and second, how digital justice could be defined. The goal is to conclude in a comprehensive definition of digital justice.

Links

RIS

TY  - CHAP
AU  - Busser, E. de
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-09-24
T1  - Rethinking digital justice
SP  - 2361-2373
UR  - https://www.boe.es/biblioteca_juridica/publicacion.php?id=PUB-DP-2026-417
AB  - Digital technology redefines the way that justice is delivered and received. This observation led to a number of insights on how to describe this still developing field of what is often referred to as digital justice. But what exactly is digital
justice? What is included and what is not? Academic literature and policy documents have dealt with digital justice in both civil and criminal justice by roughly using two approaches: a more restrictive approach using technology and the focal
point and a wider approach using technology as the starting point for a further analysis of its impact on human rights. Both approaches have their merits. Yet, since the topic of digitalisation and justice is an ever-evolving theme, it is necessary
to study what both approaches consist of and whether they stand the test of time. For that reason, this paper first unpacks how academia and policy have defined digital justice thus far and second, how digital justice could be defined. The goal is to conclude in a comprehensive definition of digital justice.
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Chapter{nokey,
	title = {Rethinking digital justice},
	author = {Busser, E. de},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-09-24},
	pages = {2361-2373},
	abstract = {Digital technology redefines the way that justice is delivered and received. This observation led to a number of insights on how to describe this still developing field of what is often referred to as digital justice. But what exactly is digital
justice? What is included and what is not? Academic literature and policy documents have dealt with digital justice in both civil and criminal justice by roughly using two approaches: a more restrictive approach using technology and the focal
point and a wider approach using technology as the starting point for a further analysis of its impact on human rights. Both approaches have their merits. Yet, since the topic of digitalisation and justice is an ever-evolving theme, it is necessary
to study what both approaches consist of and whether they stand the test of time. For that reason, this paper first unpacks how academia and policy have defined digital justice thus far and second, how digital justice could be defined. The goal is to conclude in a comprehensive definition of digital justice.},
}

Save .bib

Schrödinger’s Data: Rethinking the Binary Distinction Between Personal and Non- Personal Data in the Age of Synthetic Information. external link

Nikolaeva, V.M.

In: Legal Challenges in Data Driven Innovation, University of Groningen Press, 2026, ISBN: 978-94-034-3170-3

Abstract

One might wonder what the Austrian physicist’s famous thought experiment and data classification have in common. In fact, the paradoxical dual state of simultaneous aliveness and death of Schrödinger’s cat, could be used as a practical foundation to exemplify a similar behaviour when distinguishing between personal and non-personal data in the context of synthetic information. The European data protection framework has at its core the binary distinction between personal and non-personal data. However, the current increase in the implementation of synthetic data, meaning algorithmically generated information, poses a challenge to this rigid classification. This is mainly because while synthetic data is often seen as a privacy-enhancing technology, not all synthetic information is the same and the risk of reidentification makes its classification legally ambiguous. Hence, as it will be further illustrated, and much like Schrödinger’s hypothetical cat sealed inside a box – which results both death and alive until the box is opened, data’s categorisation may require a more fluid approach. This opinion paper examines whether the binary model under the GDPR is sufficient to mitigate the adverse impacts of synthetic data. The first chapter exemplifies the nature of this kind of data, as well as the methodologies utilised to generate it, and possible legal challenges related to its use. Next, the limitations of the current EU data protection law framework are highlighted, particularly focusing on its applicability on synthetic data and dynamic data flows. Finally, the paper introduces alternative perspectives to the risk-based approach and binary divide between personal and non-personal data, drawing also from quantum mechanics notions. By critiquing the inadequacy of the current framework considering synthetic data through a critical, and interdisciplinary technology-focused legal lens, this paper argues data protection law must evolve beyond static classification, focusing instead on the ever-evolving status of data. At the same time, it recognises further discussion is still needed within a field that is relatively novel.

Links

RIS

TY  - CHAP
AU  - Nikolaeva, V.M.
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-05-01
T1  - Schrödinger’s Data: Rethinking the Binary Distinction Between Personal and Non- Personal Data in the Age of Synthetic Information.
DO  - https://doi.org/10.21827/69c502d0005c0
AB  - One might wonder what the Austrian physicist’s famous thought experiment and data classification have in common. In fact, the paradoxical dual state of simultaneous aliveness and death of Schrödinger’s cat, could be used as a practical foundation to exemplify a similar behaviour when distinguishing between personal and non-personal data in the context of synthetic information. The European data protection framework has at its core the binary distinction between personal and non-personal data. However, the current increase in the implementation of synthetic data, meaning algorithmically generated information, poses a challenge to this rigid classification. This is mainly because while synthetic data is often seen as a privacy-enhancing technology, not all synthetic information is the same and the risk of reidentification makes its classification legally ambiguous. Hence, as it will be further illustrated, and much like Schrödinger’s hypothetical cat sealed inside a box – which results both death and alive until the box is opened, data’s categorisation may require a more fluid approach. This opinion paper examines whether the binary model under the GDPR is sufficient to mitigate the adverse impacts of synthetic data. The first chapter exemplifies the nature of this kind of data, as well as the methodologies utilised to generate it, and possible legal challenges related to its use. Next, the limitations of the current EU data protection law framework are highlighted, particularly focusing on its applicability on synthetic data and dynamic data flows. Finally, the paper introduces alternative perspectives to the risk-based approach and binary divide between personal and non-personal data, drawing also from quantum mechanics notions. By critiquing the inadequacy of the current framework considering synthetic data through a critical, and interdisciplinary technology-focused legal lens, this paper argues data protection law must evolve beyond static classification, focusing instead on the ever-evolving status of data. At the same time, it recognises further discussion is still needed within a field that is relatively novel.
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Chapter{nokey,
	title = {Schrödinger’s Data: Rethinking the Binary Distinction Between Personal and Non- Personal Data in the Age of Synthetic Information.},
	author = {Nikolaeva, V.M.},
	url = {https://opentextbooks.rug.nl/currentlegalchallengesindatadriveninnovation/},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.21827/69c502d0005c0},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-05-01},
	abstract = {One might wonder what the Austrian physicist’s famous thought experiment and data classification have in common. In fact, the paradoxical dual state of simultaneous aliveness and death of Schrödinger’s cat, could be used as a practical foundation to exemplify a similar behaviour when distinguishing between personal and non-personal data in the context of synthetic information. The European data protection framework has at its core the binary distinction between personal and non-personal data. However, the current increase in the implementation of synthetic data, meaning algorithmically generated information, poses a challenge to this rigid classification. This is mainly because while synthetic data is often seen as a privacy-enhancing technology, not all synthetic information is the same and the risk of reidentification makes its classification legally ambiguous. Hence, as it will be further illustrated, and much like Schrödinger’s hypothetical cat sealed inside a box – which results both death and alive until the box is opened, data’s categorisation may require a more fluid approach. This opinion paper examines whether the binary model under the GDPR is sufficient to mitigate the adverse impacts of synthetic data. The first chapter exemplifies the nature of this kind of data, as well as the methodologies utilised to generate it, and possible legal challenges related to its use. Next, the limitations of the current EU data protection law framework are highlighted, particularly focusing on its applicability on synthetic data and dynamic data flows. Finally, the paper introduces alternative perspectives to the risk-based approach and binary divide between personal and non-personal data, drawing also from quantum mechanics notions. By critiquing the inadequacy of the current framework considering synthetic data through a critical, and interdisciplinary technology-focused legal lens, this paper argues data protection law must evolve beyond static classification, focusing instead on the ever-evolving status of data. At the same time, it recognises further discussion is still needed within a field that is relatively novel.},
}

Save .bib

One gate leads to many doors, a case study of MyGate in India download

Mittal, A.

In: Transgressive Tech: The Privatization of the Public Interest, Routledge, 2026, pp: 83-92, ISBN: 9781003708551

Abstract

This chapter argues for why sector transgressions are not just a phenomenon of big tech, but equally present in small platforms. Through an analysis of the MyGate application, which focuses on community management in residential associations, she demonstrates how the company leverages its dominance in the sector by diversifying its offerings to move from a focus on identity verification to aspects such as payments. In doing so, this chapter argues that, much like big tech, these platforms place an emphasis on increasing the services on offer before focusing on profits, and in this particular case, see the road to growth as being shaped by super-app ambitions.

Links

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Chapter{nokey,
	title = {One gate leads to many doors, a case study of MyGate in India},
	author = {Mittal, A.},
	url = {https://www.ivir.nl/nl/publications/one-gate-leads-to-many-doors-a-case-study-of-mygate-in-india/one-gate-leads-to-many-doors-a-case-study-of-mygate-in-india_26_09_24_16_08_23/},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003708551},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-05-22},
	pages = {83-92},
	abstract = {This chapter argues for why sector transgressions are not just a phenomenon of big tech, but equally present in small platforms. Through an analysis of the MyGate application, which focuses on community management in residential associations, she demonstrates how the company leverages its dominance in the sector by diversifying its offerings to move from a focus on identity verification to aspects such as payments. In doing so, this chapter argues that, much like big tech, these platforms place an emphasis on increasing the services on offer before focusing on profits, and in this particular case, see the road to growth as being shaped by super-app ambitions.},
}

Save .bib

Loss of judicial sight? The impact of assistive AI technologies on judicial perception — beyond the question of discretion

Domselaar, I. van & Banks, I.

Computer Law & Security Review: The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice, vol. 63, pp: 1-14, 2026

Abstract

Recent scholarship and judicial guidelines for the ethical use of technology have devoted considerable attention to the question of how the use of assistive AI technologies may impact – and potentially constrain or degrade – judicial discretion as an inherent factor characterising the human element of the judicial process. Drawing on perception-centred approaches to morality, this article addresses the largely overlooked question of how the use of these technologies may affect judges’ arguably more foundational and pervasive capacity for judicial perception. Judicial perception is an intrinsically valuable, multifaceted legal-ethical capacity that enables judges to register and value the salient facts of the cases that come before them. We develop our argument through an analysis of three hypothetical cases in which judges make use of three different AI tools to support some aspect of their decision-making. After interrogating potential opportunities for their use to support or enhance judicial perception, we conclude that these technologies are more likely to systematically steer judges’ attention away from the particulars of each case, distort their legal-ethical vision, or further entrench their already biased vision. This could lead to failures in – or the gradual degradation of – judicial sight, with consequences for the way in which judges exercise their discretion. To the extent that this loss of judicial sight occurs across the judiciary and over time, we anticipate three potential impacts on the justice system more broadly: a less-discussed form of judicial deskilling; diminished public perceptions of procedural fairness; and a loss of legal-ethical meaning.

Links

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106397

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Domselaar, I. van
AU  - Banks, I.
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-09-24
T1  - Loss of judicial sight? The impact of assistive AI technologies on judicial perception — beyond the question of discretion
JO  - Computer Law & Security Review: The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice
VL  - 63
SP  - 1-14
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106397
AB  - Recent scholarship and judicial guidelines for the ethical use of technology have devoted considerable attention to the question of how the use of assistive AI technologies may impact – and potentially constrain or degrade – judicial discretion as an inherent factor characterising the human element of the judicial process. Drawing on perception-centred approaches to morality, this article addresses the largely overlooked question of how the use of these technologies may affect judges’ arguably more foundational and pervasive capacity for judicial perception. Judicial perception is an intrinsically valuable, multifaceted legal-ethical capacity that enables judges to register and value the salient facts of the cases that come before them. We develop our argument through an analysis of three hypothetical cases in which judges make use of three different AI tools to support some aspect of their decision-making. After interrogating potential opportunities for their use to support or enhance judicial perception, we conclude that these technologies are more likely to systematically steer judges’ attention away from the particulars of each case, distort their legal-ethical vision, or further entrench their already biased vision. This could lead to failures in – or the gradual degradation of – judicial sight, with consequences for the way in which judges exercise their discretion. To the extent that this loss of judicial sight occurs across the judiciary and over time, we anticipate three potential impacts on the justice system more broadly: a less-discussed form of judicial deskilling; diminished public perceptions of procedural fairness; and a loss of legal-ethical meaning.
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{nokey,
	title = {Loss of judicial sight? The impact of assistive AI technologies on judicial perception — beyond the question of discretion},
	author = {Domselaar, I. van and Banks, I.},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2026.106397},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-09-24},
	journal = {Computer Law & Security Review: The International Journal of Technology Law and Practice},
	volume = {63},
	pages = {1-14},
	abstract = {Recent scholarship and judicial guidelines for the ethical use of technology have devoted considerable attention to the question of how the use of assistive AI technologies may impact – and potentially constrain or degrade – judicial discretion as an inherent factor characterising the human element of the judicial process. Drawing on perception-centred approaches to morality, this article addresses the largely overlooked question of how the use of these technologies may affect judges’ arguably more foundational and pervasive capacity for judicial perception. Judicial perception is an intrinsically valuable, multifaceted legal-ethical capacity that enables judges to register and value the salient facts of the cases that come before them. We develop our argument through an analysis of three hypothetical cases in which judges make use of three different AI tools to support some aspect of their decision-making. After interrogating potential opportunities for their use to support or enhance judicial perception, we conclude that these technologies are more likely to systematically steer judges’ attention away from the particulars of each case, distort their legal-ethical vision, or further entrench their already biased vision. This could lead to failures in – or the gradual degradation of – judicial sight, with consequences for the way in which judges exercise their discretion. To the extent that this loss of judicial sight occurs across the judiciary and over time, we anticipate three potential impacts on the justice system more broadly: a less-discussed form of judicial deskilling; diminished public perceptions of procedural fairness; and a loss of legal-ethical meaning.},
}

Save .bib

Humans-around-the-loop: A relational theory of human oversight external link

Banks, I.

The Digital Constitutionalist, 2026

Links

https://digi-con.org/humans-around-the-loop-a-relational-theory-of-human-oversight/

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Learning Call [Video]: GenAI and the DSA’s Systemic Risk Framework external link

Quintais, J., Schwemer, S., Çetin, B.S. & Albert, J.A.

2026

Abstract

This Learning Call, part of an ongoing series on current issues surrounding the Digital Services Act (DSA), examines generative AI as a test case for the DSA’s systemic risk framework. Speakers discuss the nature of GenAI‑related risks and the governance mechanisms provided by the DSA and related legal frameworks to address them. Such risks may arise from the dissemination of synthetic and manipulated media, like deepfakes, on very large online platforms and search engines (VLOPSEs), as well as from new GenAI tools deployed by those very platforms in their content moderation systems or via embedded features like AI Overviews. Broadly, the session probes the potential and limits of the DSA’s platform‑centric, risk‑based approach to tackling the complex challenges posed by GenAI, and consider its interaction with other legal instruments (AI regulation, competition law, copyright). The session will also reflect on recent enforcement and policy developments, such as the potential VLOSE designation for services like ChatGPT, the Commission’s investigation into X’s deployment of Grok, the proposed Digital Omnibus on AI, and the review of the EU rules on copyright and AI.

Links

https://dsa-observatory.eu/2026/06/08/genai-and-the-dsas-systemic-risk-framework/

Digital Services Act (DSA), GenAI

RIS

TY  - BLOG
AU  - Quintais, J.
AU  - Schwemer, S.
AU  - Çetin, B.S.
AU  - Albert, J.A.
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-06-25
T1  - Learning Call [Video]: GenAI and the DSA’s Systemic Risk Framework
AB  - This Learning Call, part of an ongoing series on current issues surrounding the Digital Services Act (DSA), examines generative AI as a test case for the DSA’s systemic risk framework.

Speakers discuss the nature of GenAI‑related risks and the governance mechanisms provided by the DSA and related legal frameworks to address them. Such risks may arise from the dissemination of synthetic and manipulated media, like deepfakes, on very large online platforms and search engines (VLOPSEs), as well as from new GenAI tools deployed by those very platforms in their content moderation systems or via embedded features like AI Overviews.

Broadly, the session probes the potential and limits of the DSA’s platform‑centric, risk‑based approach to tackling the complex challenges posed by GenAI, and consider its interaction with other legal instruments (AI regulation, competition law, copyright). The session will also reflect on recent enforcement and policy developments, such as the potential VLOSE designation for services like ChatGPT, the Commission’s investigation into X’s deployment of Grok, the proposed Digital Omnibus on AI, and the review of the EU rules on copyright and AI.
K1  - Digital Services Act (DSA)
K1  - GenAI
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Online publication{nokey,
	title = {Learning Call [Video]: GenAI and the DSA’s Systemic Risk Framework},
	author = {Quintais, J. and Schwemer, S. and Çetin, B.S. and Albert, J.A.},
	url = {https://dsa-observatory.eu/2026/06/08/genai-and-the-dsas-systemic-risk-framework/},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-06-25},
	abstract = {This Learning Call, part of an ongoing series on current issues surrounding the Digital Services Act (DSA), examines generative AI as a test case for the DSA’s systemic risk framework.

Speakers discuss the nature of GenAI‑related risks and the governance mechanisms provided by the DSA and related legal frameworks to address them. Such risks may arise from the dissemination of synthetic and manipulated media, like deepfakes, on very large online platforms and search engines (VLOPSEs), as well as from new GenAI tools deployed by those very platforms in their content moderation systems or via embedded features like AI Overviews.

Broadly, the session probes the potential and limits of the DSA’s platform‑centric, risk‑based approach to tackling the complex challenges posed by GenAI, and consider its interaction with other legal instruments (AI regulation, competition law, copyright). The session will also reflect on recent enforcement and policy developments, such as the potential VLOSE designation for services like ChatGPT, the Commission’s investigation into X’s deployment of Grok, the proposed Digital Omnibus on AI, and the review of the EU rules on copyright and AI.},
	keywords = {Digital Services Act (DSA), GenAI},
}

Save .bib

Citizens’ attitudes toward AI in journalism and authenticity: Evidence from six countries on four different continents external link

Morosoli, S., Mattis, N., Naudts, L., Vreese, C.H. de & Helberger, N.

Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, vol. 6, pp: 1-53, 2026

Abstract

Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping journalism at an unprecedented pace, challenging long-held assumptions about what makes news credible, authentic, and human. As AI systems increasingly generate, curate, and personalize information, societies around the world are grappling with questions about how this transformation affects trust in the media and the perceived integrity of journalism. Scholars have highlighted that AI not only changes newsroom practices but also redefines audiences' expectations of journalistic values such as accuracy and transparency. Yet, public perceptions of these changes remain under-explored from a global, comparative perspective, as previous research has mainly taken a Western perspective. This study, therefore, examines to what extent individuals' attitudes toward AI in journalism and perceptions of authenticity differ across six culturally diverse countries: Brazil, Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands, South Africa, and the United States. Using nationally representative surveys (N = 6,961), we analyze four core dimensions: (1) journalistic principles for AI-supported news, (2) individual engagement intentions for AI-supported news, (3) general authenticity perceptions across different dimensions and (4) the perceived impact of AI on them. Our findings show significant cross-national heterogeneity in attitudes toward AI in journalism, with more pronounced optimism in South Africa and Brazil and more pronounced skepticism in Western countries. Moreover, we frequently find ambivalent attitudes, as well as high degrees of heterogeneity within individual countries as well, with self-reported generative AI use emerging as one explanatory factor. Engagement intentions demonstrate a trend for ignoring AI-supported news, particularly in Western contexts, alongside a universal reluctance to share such content. This reflects broader trust issues and reputational concerns. Despite these differences, respondents across all countries converge on the importance of the human element when it comes to authenticity, rooted in journalists' character and values.

Links

Artificial intelligence, Journalism

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Morosoli, S.
AU  - Mattis, N.
AU  - Naudts, L.
AU  - Vreese, C.H. de
AU  - Helberger, N.
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-09-15
T1  - Citizens’ attitudes toward AI in journalism and authenticity: Evidence from six countries on four different continents
JO  - Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media
VL  - 6
SP  - 1-53
DO  - https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2026.019
AB  - Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping journalism at an unprecedented pace, challenging long-held assumptions about what makes news credible, authentic, and human. As AI systems increasingly generate, curate, and personalize information, societies around the world are grappling with questions about how this transformation affects trust in the media and the perceived integrity of journalism. Scholars have highlighted that AI not only changes newsroom practices but also redefines audiences\' expectations of journalistic values such as accuracy and transparency. Yet, public perceptions of these changes remain under-explored from a global, comparative perspective, as previous research has mainly taken a Western perspective. This study, therefore, examines to what extent individuals\' attitudes toward AI in journalism and perceptions of authenticity differ across six culturally diverse countries: Brazil, Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands, South Africa, and the United States. Using nationally representative surveys (N = 6,961), we analyze four core dimensions: (1) journalistic principles for AI-supported news, (2) individual engagement intentions for AI-supported news, (3) general authenticity perceptions across different dimensions and (4) the perceived impact of AI on them. Our findings show significant cross-national heterogeneity in attitudes toward AI in journalism, with more pronounced optimism in South Africa and Brazil and more pronounced skepticism in Western countries. Moreover, we frequently find ambivalent attitudes, as well as high degrees of heterogeneity within individual countries as well, with self-reported generative AI use emerging as one explanatory factor. Engagement intentions demonstrate a trend for ignoring AI-supported news, particularly in Western contexts, alongside a universal reluctance to share such content. This reflects broader trust issues and reputational concerns. Despite these differences, respondents across all countries converge on the importance of the human element when it comes to authenticity, rooted in journalists\' character and values.
K1  - Artificial intelligence
K1  - Journalism
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{nokey,
	title = {Citizens’ attitudes toward AI in journalism and authenticity: Evidence from six countries on four different continents},
	author = {Morosoli, S. and Mattis, N. and Naudts, L. and Vreese, C.H. de and Helberger, N.},
	url = {https://journalqd.org/article/view/9452},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.51685/jqd.2026.019},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-09-15},
	journal = {Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media},
	volume = {6},
	pages = {1-53},
	abstract = {Artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping journalism at an unprecedented pace, challenging long-held assumptions about what makes news credible, authentic, and human. As AI systems increasingly generate, curate, and personalize information, societies around the world are grappling with questions about how this transformation affects trust in the media and the perceived integrity of journalism. Scholars have highlighted that AI not only changes newsroom practices but also redefines audiences\' expectations of journalistic values such as accuracy and transparency. Yet, public perceptions of these changes remain under-explored from a global, comparative perspective, as previous research has mainly taken a Western perspective. This study, therefore, examines to what extent individuals\' attitudes toward AI in journalism and perceptions of authenticity differ across six culturally diverse countries: Brazil, Denmark, Japan, the Netherlands, South Africa, and the United States. Using nationally representative surveys (N = 6,961), we analyze four core dimensions: (1) journalistic principles for AI-supported news, (2) individual engagement intentions for AI-supported news, (3) general authenticity perceptions across different dimensions and (4) the perceived impact of AI on them. Our findings show significant cross-national heterogeneity in attitudes toward AI in journalism, with more pronounced optimism in South Africa and Brazil and more pronounced skepticism in Western countries. Moreover, we frequently find ambivalent attitudes, as well as high degrees of heterogeneity within individual countries as well, with self-reported generative AI use emerging as one explanatory factor. Engagement intentions demonstrate a trend for ignoring AI-supported news, particularly in Western contexts, alongside a universal reluctance to share such content. This reflects broader trust issues and reputational concerns. Despite these differences, respondents across all countries converge on the importance of the human element when it comes to authenticity, rooted in journalists\' character and values.},
	keywords = {Artificial intelligence, Journalism},
}

Save .bib

How does political efficacy condition clicks on politics? Understanding information-selection behavior in algorithmic feeds over time

Wan, J., Araujo, T., Helberger, N. & Vreese, C.H. de

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 31, iss. : 5, 2026

Abstract

This study uses political efficacy to explain individual differences in selecting political information on algorithmic feeds. Combining survey data and 186 Dutch individuals’ usage histories of Google Discover, a fully algorithmically curated feed, we examined both within-person changes of information-selection behavior over time and between-person differences conditioned by political efficacy in three aspects: the proportion of political information selected by users, exposure diversity as manifested via sources, and proportion of negative political information. While we did not find any longitudinal change conditioned by external efficacy on information-selection patterns, we found that internally efficacious users are more resilient to prevalent concerns about algorithms’ negative influence on political information consumption and exposure diversity. We observed their stable proportions of political information consumption and consumption from increasingly diverse sources over time. Alarmingly, there is a growing divide in exposure diversity between less and more efficacious users over time. Altogether, our study not only highlights users’ agency in navigating algorithmic environments but also underscores the importance of empowering users with account of different vulnerabilities.

Links

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmag022

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Wan, J.
AU  - Araujo, T.
AU  - Helberger, N.
AU  - Vreese, C.H. de
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026-09-17
T1  - How does political efficacy condition clicks on politics? Understanding information-selection behavior in algorithmic feeds over time
JO  - Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
VL  - 31
IS  - 5
DO  - https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmag022
AB  - This study uses political efficacy to explain individual differences in selecting political information on algorithmic feeds. Combining survey data and 186 Dutch individuals’ usage histories of Google Discover, a fully algorithmically curated feed, we examined both within-person changes of information-selection behavior over time and between-person differences conditioned by political efficacy in three aspects: the proportion of political information selected by users, exposure diversity as manifested via sources, and proportion of negative political information. While we did not find any longitudinal change conditioned by external efficacy on information-selection patterns, we found that internally efficacious users are more resilient to prevalent concerns about algorithms’ negative influence on political information consumption and exposure diversity. We observed their stable proportions of political information consumption and consumption from increasingly diverse sources over time. Alarmingly, there is a growing divide in exposure diversity between less and more efficacious users over time. Altogether, our study not only highlights users’ agency in navigating algorithmic environments but also underscores the importance of empowering users with account of different vulnerabilities.
ER  -

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Article{nokey,
	title = {How does political efficacy condition clicks on politics? Understanding information-selection behavior in algorithmic feeds over time},
	author = {Wan, J. and Araujo, T. and Helberger, N. and Vreese, C.H. de},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmag022},
	year = {2026},
	date = {2026-09-17},
	journal = {Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication},
	volume = {31},
	issue = {5},
	abstract = {This study uses political efficacy to explain individual differences in selecting political information on algorithmic feeds. Combining survey data and 186 Dutch individuals’ usage histories of Google Discover, a fully algorithmically curated feed, we examined both within-person changes of information-selection behavior over time and between-person differences conditioned by political efficacy in three aspects: the proportion of political information selected by users, exposure diversity as manifested via sources, and proportion of negative political information. While we did not find any longitudinal change conditioned by external efficacy on information-selection patterns, we found that internally efficacious users are more resilient to prevalent concerns about algorithms’ negative influence on political information consumption and exposure diversity. We observed their stable proportions of political information consumption and consumption from increasingly diverse sources over time. Alarmingly, there is a growing divide in exposure diversity between less and more efficacious users over time. Altogether, our study not only highlights users’ agency in navigating algorithmic environments but also underscores the importance of empowering users with account of different vulnerabilities.},
}

Save .bib

Why Human Rights Lawyers Should Care About Intellectual Property external link

Izyumenko, E. & Geiger, C.

Human Rights Here, 2026

Links

https://www.humanrightshere.com/post/why-human-rights-lawyers-should-care-about-intellectual-property

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

From Upcycling to Book Destruction: Copyright Exhaustion’s Environmental Paradox external link

Izyumenko, E.

Links

https://legalblogs.wolterskluwer.com/copyright-blog/from-upcycling-to-book-destruction-copyright-exhaustions-environmental-paradox/

Copyright, upcycling

RIS

Save .RIS

Bibtex

Save .bib

Top Keywords

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Abstract

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Links

RIS

Bibtex

Links

RIS

Bibtex