Heuristics of Doubt: Information Foraging in Digital Media Environments

Hakemuksen tiivistelmä

All over the world, experts and ordinary citizens alike are aware of and worried about the surge of misinformation – false and misleading messages circulating in the media. Misinformation has been acknowledged as one of the key challenges to democracy in the early twenty-first century because it creates a polarised and hostile information environment in which deliberation is in decline. Extant research generated important knowledge on what makes people gullible to misinformation and how to help them spot the so-called “fake news.” Yet, we still know surprisingly little about what makes people doubt the credibility of information they encounter. Since doubt is a sceptical intuition, it is the key condition for the onset of critical thinking that has been shown to help people spot misinformation. Drawing on the ecological rationality approach, we argue that people’s encounters with information online can be understood as “information foraging” and their practices are driven by simple heuristics, colloquially “rules of thumb.” Specifically, H-DOUBT studies information foraging among Finnish media professionals and ordinary citizens to understand their heuristics of doubt. Using observational and experimental methods, we explore what triggers doubt in the context of polarised topics and how people act upon their doubt. Thereby, our project generates new insights into how people in contemporary Finland exactly evaluate information their encounter online. We further explore whether we can boost people’s information foraging skills in an experimental setting. Our study will break new ground in understanding one of the core practices associated with the quality of democratic deliberation - online political information consumption – and address the challenges of misinformation from a novel theoretical angle.

Globally, concerns about misinformation are widespread among media experts, journalists, and lay audiences. While much research has explored why individuals fall for false or misleading information, less attention has been paid to how they doubt the credibility of what they encounter online. Specifically, the H-DOUBT project examines information foraging among Finnish media professionals and ordinary citizens to better understand their heuristics of doubt. Drawing on the ecological rationality framework, we focus on “heuristics of doubt”—the intuitive cues that trigger scepticism.

Using a multi-method design that combines surveys and think-aloud protocols, we identify common heuristics such as recognition, prestige bias, and the “too good to be true” rule. Yet, our findings reveal that these broad strategies often lack the granularity needed to capture how individuals actually assess information in practice. To address this, we introduce the concept of microheuristics: flexible, context-sensitive rules shaped by cultural norms, personal experiences, and media environments.

Importantly, our analysis shows that media professionals frequently evaluate these “layman” heuristics through the lens of their own expertise. Professionals tend to frame ordinary users’ rules of thumb as useful, yet incomplete. At the same time, lay audiences often rely on subtle, experience-based cues that professionals may overlook when asked to provide guidelines for everyday media encounters. This contrast highlights a tension between professional intuitions, which combines experience with systematic verification, and everyday heuristics, which prioritize speed, familiarity, and trust in social context.