How do we decide what to believe when we read the news online? Can we tell the difference between facts and opinions? What makes us trust (or distrust) news – and how do new technologies like AI complicate this?
This pre-defence workshop brings together researchers working on language, media, and communication to explore how people navigate today’s news landscape. Through a series of talks and discussions, we examine how news is interpreted, evaluated, and how it can influence audiences. The workshop focuses on topics such as subjectivity, misinformation, news framing, and the role of language and emerging technologies in shaping how news is perceived.
We warmly invite researchers, students and media professionals interested in these topics to join the discussion.
The workshop is organized in connection with the PhD defence of Elena Savinova (Radboud University), which will take place on June 2. More information about the defence can be found here.
The event will be held in English.
Program
10:30 – 10:45 – Welcome and Introduction
10:45 – 11:30 – keynote by prof. Elsi Kaiser (University of Southern California, Los Angeles)
Who shares that opinion? On the perceived generalizability of subjective information
Humans over-generalize their own opinions onto others: We assume others like the same things we like (e.g. egocentric attribution, false consensus). It is often assumed that these generalization effects are egocentric. But what if you encounter an opinion in the news about a matter that you know nothing about: What do you assume about whether others share that opinion? Using psycholinguistic experiments, we identify systematic semantic effects on the perceived generalizability of opinions in no-egocentric contexts: Opinion valence (positive/negative) and mention of an opinion-holder (e.g. “I think”) modulate opinion generalizability, but genericity of opinions and the diversity of the population do not. I will also discuss implications of these results for how linguistic framing of subjective information influences our perceptions.
11:30 – 12:00 – prof. Jos Hornikx (Radboud University Nijmegen):
People unwilling to change their minds are unaffected by repeated interventions
One classic variable to create strong communicative interventions is the use of high-quality arguments. While people are generally sensitive to argument quality, the underlying research has typically documented this effect only once directly after the message. We therefore tested a model of persuasion over time that explores how repeated arguments varying in quality function over time and how this interacts with people’s motivation to change their minds. Analyses from our agent-based model, generating 990 simulations, show that quality and repetition are both associated with greater persuasion, but only with a minimum level of motivation from the receiver.
12:00 – 13:00 – lunch
13:00 – 13:30 – dr. Astrid Vandendaele (Leiden University; Vrije Universiteit Brussel):
From Seeing to Judging: AI-Generated Images, Editorial Framing, and the Evaluation of News
Generative AI challenges the evidentiary status of images in journalism by enabling photorealistic visuals without real-world referents. This talk examines how audiences evaluate visual news under these conditions. Drawing on audience experiments and interviews with journalists, the findings suggest that people struggle to distinguish authentic from AI-generated images and rely on contextual cues such as labels and source signals. Transparency shows ambivalent effects, as disclosures do not necessarily increase trust. The talk argues that news evaluation is increasingly shaped by the interpretation of editorial choices rather than visual evidence alone.
13:30 – 14:00 – Liesje van der Linden (Tilburg University):
Acknowledging subjectivity in online news discussions: how does it relate to perceived polarization and populist viewpoints?
Online discussions are often experienced as hostile and highly polarizing. But what if the way in which we present our opinions online could change these experiences? During this talk the effects of adding explicit marking of subjectivity to opinions, e.g. ‘I think that…’, will be discussed. We will explore how acknowledging subjectivity in this way affects perceived polarization. Because perceived polarization online is also influenced by an overrepresentation of populist viewpoints, we will continue with an exploration of the relationship between acknowledging subjectivity and populism.
14:00 – 14:20 – coffee break
14:20 – 14:50 – Stef Hankel (Radboud University Nijmegen):
Characterizing online conspiracy discourse: A comparative corpus analysis on the linguistic characteristics of conspiracy related discussions in online forums
This research investigates linguistic and discursive features of conspiracy-related discourse in comment sections on two Dutch online forums (FOK! and Viva). We compare climate and vaccine related discussions and distinguish between threads that contain conspiracy claims or accusations and those that contain general disagreement between users. Rather than focusing on isolated comments, the current study reconstructs discussions as reply chains to capture the dynamics of prolonged back-and-forth discussions between users. The study asks whether conspiracy-framed discussions are characterized by distinct linguistic or discursive patterns compared to non-conspiratorial discussions. We will present the corpora that were constructed along with preliminary results.
14:50 – 15:20 – prof. Liesbeth Hermans (Windesheim University of Applied Sciences):
Constructive journalism in the context of a public-oriented approach
Due to ongoing technological and social developments, citizens’ information needs are undergoing significant change, raising the question how journalism can maintain its societal relevance. The use of specific news frames (i.e., content characteristics) shape public opinion and influence individual responses. In this context, the rise of constructive journalism is discussed. Constructive Journalism aims to contribute to accurate news coverage that goes beyond the problem and offers a counterbalance to the disproportionate focus in conventional news on negative developments, such as conflicts and incidents. Based on empirical research, the presentation discusses the effects of using a constructive approach in news on audiences such as their emotions and news needs.
15:20 – 15:50 – Plenary discussion
Lunch and coffee will be provided. After the workshop, all participants are warmly invited for drinks at CultuurCafé.
Registration
Registration is required, as places are limited. Please register using the button above before 18 May.
