CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 14

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A systematic review on design-based nudges for adolescent online safety

Agha, Zainab, Ali, Naima Samreen, Park, Jinkyung, Wisniewski, Pamela J.·2025·International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction
DOI 10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100702
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Within the realm of digital spaces, much of the nudging research has focused on general populations, which may not be applicable to nudges for adolescents, as minors are often more vulnerable to online risks and have unique developmental needs. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review of 52 articles from the past 15 years that focused on technology-mediated nudges for teens’ online safety. We found that most nudges were designed for protecting teens as victims of cyberbullying in public settings, with recent trends towards studying nudges for diverse risk types and perspectives (e.g., risk perpetrators and bystanders). Most of the nudges were designed to be triggered during or after the risk occurrence, with fewer preventative approaches. Expanding upon Caraban et al.’s nudging framework, we found that commonly used mechanisms for nudges facilitated alternate actions or education, confronted youth with the consequences of risks, or involved parents. Lastly, most of the work focused on formative understanding or designing nudges for adolescents, with fewer ecologically valid evaluations of these nudges. We recommend building context-aware nudges with positive framing that can provide personalized guidance to help teens build resilience. We call for further investigation into how nudges can effectively empower adolescents in different cultural contextsby supporting autonomy and collective safety, while also confronting perpetrators and societal challenge…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100702

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 11 references

Research works printed but not linked: 99

  1. Acquisti, 2017, Nudges for privacy and security: Understanding and assisting users’ choices online, ACM Computing Surveys, 50, 1, 10.1145/3054926 · DOI
  2. Agha, 2023, ” Strike at the root”: Co-designing real-time social media interventions for adolescent online risk prevention, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7, 1, 10.1145/3579625 · DOI
  3. Agha, Z., Chatlani, N., Razi, A., & Wisniewski, P. (2020). Towards conducting responsible research with teens and parents regarding online risks. In Extended abstracts of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–8). · DOI
  4. Agha, Z., Zhang, Z., Obajemu, O., Shirley, L., & J. Wisniewski, P. (2022). A Case Study on User Experience Bootcamps with Teens to Co-Design Real-Time Online Safety Interventions. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems extended abstracts (pp. 1–8). · DOI
  5. Aghajari, 2023, Methodological middle spaces: Addressing the need for methodological innovation to achieve simultaneous realism, control, and scalability in experimental studies of AI-mediated communication, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7, 1
  6. Ali, N. S., Agha, Z., Chatlani, N., Park, J., & Wisniewski, P. J. (2024). A Case Study on Facilitating a Long-Term Youth Advisory Board to Involve Youth in Adolescent Online Safety Research. In Extended abstracts of the CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–8). · DOI
  7. Ali, 2023, Getting meta: A multimodal approach for detecting unsafe conversations within instagram direct messages of youth, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7, 1, 10.1145/3579608 · DOI
  8. Almuhimedi, H., Schaub, F., Sadeh, N., Adjerid, I., Acquisti, A., Gluck, J., et al. (2015). Your location has been shared 5,398 times! A field study on mobile app privacy nudging. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 787–796). · DOI
  9. Ashktorab, Z., & Vitak, J. (2016). Designing cyberbullying mitigation and prevention solutions through participatory design with teenagers. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3895–3905). · DOI
  10. Badillo-Urquiola, K., Agha, Z., Akter, M., & Wisniewski, P. (2020). Towards Assets-based Approaches for Adolescent Online Safety. In Badillo-urquiola, agha, z., akter, k., wisniewski, p.,(2020)“towards assets-based approaches for adolescent online safety” extended abstract presented at the ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work workshop on operationalizing an assets-based design of technology,(CSCW 2020).
  11. Badillo-Urquiola, 2021, Conducting risky research with teens: co-designing for the ethical treatment and protection of adolescents, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4, 1, 10.1145/3432930 · DOI
  12. Badillo-Urquiola, K., Smriti, D., McNally, B., Golub, E., Bonsignore, E., & Wisniewski, P. J. (2019). Stranger danger! social media app features co-designed with children to keep them safe online. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 394–406). · DOI
  13. Berndt, 1979, Developmental changes in conformity to peers and parents., Developmental Psychology, 15, 608, 10.1037/0012-1649.15.6.608 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Bowler, 2021, The meaning of “participation” in co-design with children and youth: relationships, roles, and interactions, Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58, 13, 10.1002/pra2.432 · DOI
  15. Branley, 2018, Risky behavior via social media: The role of reasoned and social reactive pathways, Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 183, 10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.036 · DOI
  16. Buzzi, M. (2011). Children and YouTube: access to safe content. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCHI Italian chapter international conference on computer-human interaction: facing complexity (pp. 125–131). · DOI
  17. Caraban, A., Karapanos, E., Gonçalves, D., & Campos, P. (2019). 23 ways to nudge: A review of technology-mediated nudging in human-computer interaction. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–15). · DOI
  18. Cardella, 2022, Green is good—The impact of information nudges on the selection of voluntary green-power plans, The Energy Journal, 43, 10.5547/01956574.43.1.ecar · DOI
  19. Carpenter, 2017, Expert sources in warnings may reduce the extent of identity disclosure in cyber contexts, International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 33, 215, 10.1080/10447318.2016.1232909 · DOI
  20. Chatlani, 2023, Teen as research-apprentice: a restorative justice approach for centering adolescents as the authority of their own online safety, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 35, 10.1016/j.ijcci.2022.100549 · DOI
  21. Chen, 2019, Reducing harm from media: A meta-analysis of parental mediation, Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 96, 173, 10.1177/1077699018754908 · DOI
  22. Dahlbäck, N., Jönsson, A., & Ahrenberg, L. (1993). Wizard of Oz studies: why and how. In Proceedings of the 1st international conference on intelligent user interfaces (pp. 193–200). · DOI
  23. Davis, K., Slovak, P., Landesman, R., Pitt, C., Ghajar, A., Schleider, J. L., et al. (2023). Supporting Teens’ Intentional Social Media Use Through Interaction Design: An exploratory proof-of-concept study. In Proceedings of the 22nd annual ACM interaction design and children conference (pp. 322–334). · DOI · Paper page
  24. Dempsey, 2022, Children designing privacy warnings: Informing a set of design guidelines, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 31, 10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100446 · DOI
  25. DeSmet, 2018, The efficacy of the friendly attac serious digital game to promote prosocial bystander behavior in cyberbullying among young adolescents: A cluster-randomized controlled trial, Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 336, 10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.011 · DOI
  26. DeSmet, 2016, Bridging behavior science and gaming theory: Using the intervention mapping protocol to design a serious game against cyberbullying, Computers in Human behavior, 56, 337, 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.039 · DOI
  27. DeSmet, 2014, Determinants of self-reported bystander behavior in cyberbullying incidents amongst adolescents, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 207, 10.1089/cyber.2013.0027 · DOI
  28. DiFranzo, D., Taylor, S. H., Kazerooni, F., Wherry, O. D., & Bazarova, N. N. (2018). Upstanding by design: Bystander intervention in cyberbullying. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–12). · DOI
  29. Dillon, 2015, Unresponsive or un-noticed?: Cyberbystander intervention in an experimental cyberbullying context, Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 144, 10.1016/j.chb.2014.12.009 · DOI
  30. Dinakar, 2012, Common sense reasoning for detection, prevention, and mitigation of cyberbullying, ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), 2, 1, 10.1145/2362394.2362400 · DOI
  31. Erickson, 2016, The boundaries between: Parental involvement in a teen’s online world, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67, 1384, 10.1002/asi.23450 · DOI
  32. Franco, M., Falyoun, S. A., Fisher, K. E., Gaggi, O., Ghamri-Doudane, Y., Nashwan, A. J., et al. (2022). A Technology Exploration towards Trustable and Safe Use of Social Media for Vulnerable Women based on Islam and Arab Culture. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM conference on information technology for social good (pp. 138–145). · DOI
  33. Gaikwad, G., & Jain, A. (2017). Feelbot: Reducing use of bad words in children through wearable using artificial intelligence and gamification. In Proceedings of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children (pp. 777–781). · DOI
  34. Gennari, 2024, How to enable young teens to design responsibly, Future Generation Computer Systems, 150, 303, 10.1016/j.future.2023.09.004 · DOI
  35. Ghosh, A. K., Badillo-Urquiola, K. A., Xu, H., Rosson, M. B., Carroll, J. M., & Wisniewski, P. (2017). Examining parents’ technical mediation of teens’ mobile devices. In Companion of the 2017 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work and social computing (pp. 179–182). · DOI
  36. Ghosh, 2022, “Not all my friends are friends”: Audience-group-based nudges for managing location privacy, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73, 797, 10.1002/asi.24580 · DOI
  37. Gongane, 2022, Detection and moderation of detrimental content on social media platforms: current status and future directions, Social Network Analysis and Mining, 12, 129, 10.1007/s13278-022-00951-3 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Hackworth, 2018, Limitations of “just gender”: The need for an intersectional reframing of online harassment discourse and research, Mediating Misogyny: Gender, Technology, and Harassment, 51, 10.1007/978-3-319-72917-6_3 · DOI
  39. Hartikainen, 2019, Children’s design recommendations for online safety education, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 22, 10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.100146 · DOI
  40. Hartikainen, 2021, Safe sexting: The advice and support adolescents receive from peers regarding online sexual risks, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5, 1, 10.1145/3449116 · DOI
  41. Hutson, 2018, Systematic review of cyberbullying interventions for youth and parents with implications for evidence-based practice, Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 15, 72, 10.1111/wvn.12257 · DOI
  42. James, 2019, Teaching digital citizens in today’s world: Research and insights behind the common sense K–12 digital citizenship curriculum, Common Sense Media
  43. Ko, M., Choi, S., Yang, S., Lee, J., & Lee, U. (2015). FamiLync: facilitating participatory parental mediation of adolescents’ smartphone use. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM international joint conference on pervasive and ubiquitous computing (pp. 867–878). · DOI
  44. Kumaraguru, 2010, Teaching johnny not to fall for phish, ACM Transactions on Internet Technology (TOIT), 10, 1, 10.1145/1754393.1754396 · DOI
  45. Lempa, P., Ptaszynski, M., & Masui, F. (2015). Cyberbullying blocker application for android. In 7th Language & technology conference. lTC’15 Poznan, Poland.
  46. López-Meneses, 2020, Socioeconomic effects in cyberbullying: Global research trends in the educational context, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17, 4369, 10.3390/ijerph17124369 · DOI
  47. Lycett, 2017, ‘Nudge’interventions for improving children’s dietary behaviors in the home: A systematic review, Obesity Medicine, 7, 21, 10.1016/j.obmed.2017.06.001 · DOI
  48. Maqsood, S. (2018). Evaluation of a persuasive digital literacy game for children. In Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–6). · DOI
  49. Marcano-Olivier, 2020, Using nudges to promote healthy food choices in the school dining room: a systematic review of previous investigations, Journal of School Health, 90, 143, 10.1111/josh.12861 · DOI
  50. Marciano, 2020, Cyberbullying perpetration and victimization in youth: A meta-analysis of longitudinal studies, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 25, 163, 10.1093/jcmc/zmz031 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Martin-Storey, 2022, The online environments of sexual and gender minority youth: Contexts of risk and resilience, Journal of Family Strengths, 21, 7, 10.58464/2168-670X.1445 · DOI
  52. Masaki, H., Shibata, K., Hoshino, S., Ishihama, T., Saito, N., & Yatani, K. (2020). Exploring nudge designs to help adolescent sns users avoid privacy and safety threats. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–11). · DOI
  53. McNally, B., Kumar, P., Hordatt, C., Mauriello, M. L., Naik, S., Norooz, L., et al. (2018). Co-designing mobile online safety applications with children. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–9). · DOI
  54. Mishna, 2009, Interventions for children, youth, and parents to prevent and reduce cyber abuse, Campbell Systematic Reviews, 5, i, 10.4073/csr.2009.2 · DOI
  55. Modecki, 2022, What is digital parenting? A systematic review of past measurement and blueprint for the future, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 17, 1673, 10.1177/17456916211072458 · DOI
  56. Morag Yaar, N., Grossman, E., Kimchi, N., Nash, O., Hatan, S., & Erel, H. (2022). Tobe: a virtual keyboard and an animated character for individual and educational cyberbullying intervention. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems extended abstracts (pp. 1–6). · DOI
  57. Moreira, 2009, Social norms interventions to reduce alcohol misuse in university or college students, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 10.1002/14651858.CD006748.pub2 · DOI
  58. Nguyen, 2021, How Twitter gamifies communication, Applied Epistemology, 45, 410, 10.1093/oso/9780198833659.003.0017 · DOI
  59. Ong’ong’a, 2021, Teachers’ perception, experiences, and challenges about teens of ages 12-14 years who have reported online digital insecurity in Kenya, European Journal of Interactive Multimedia Education, 2
  60. Özdemir, 2020, Digital nudges and dark patterns: The angels and the archfiends of digital communication, Digital Scholarship in the Humanities, 35, 417, 10.1093/llc/fqz014 · DOI
  61. Palasinski, 2012, The roles of monitoring and cyberbystanders in reducing sexual abuse, Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 2014, 10.1016/j.chb.2012.05.020 · DOI
  62. Park, J., Gracie, J., Alsoubai, A., Stringhini, G., Singh, V., & Wisniewski, P. (2023). Towards Automated Detection of Risky Images Shared by Youth on Social Media. In Companion proceedings of the ACM web conference 2023 (pp. 1348–1357). · DOI
  63. Peer, 2020, Nudge me right: Personalizing online security nudges to people’s decision-making styles, Computers in Human Behavior, 109, 10.1016/j.chb.2020.106347 · DOI
  64. Poole, E. S., & Peyton, T. (2013). Interaction design research with adolescents: methodological challenges and best practices. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 211–217). · DOI
  65. Rafi, 2019, Cyberbullying in Pakistan: Positioning the aggressor, victim, and bystander, Pakistan Journal of Psychological Research, 34, 601, 10.33824/PJPR.2019.34.3.33 · DOI
  66. Rajaram, S., Roesner, F., & Nebeling, M. (2023). Reframe: An Augmented Reality Storyboarding Tool for Character-Driven Analysis of Security & Privacy Concerns. In Proceedings of the 36th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology (pp. 1–15). · DOI
  67. Razi, 2023, Sliding into my DMs: Detecting uncomfortable or unsafe sexual risk experiences within instagram direct messages grounded in the perspective of youth, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 7, 1, 10.1145/3579522 · DOI · Paper page
  68. Razi, A., AlSoubai, A., Kim, S., Naher, N., Ali, S., Stringhini, G., et al. (2022). Instagram Data Donation: A Case Study on Collecting Ecologically Valid Social Media Data for the Purpose of Adolescent Online Risk Detection. In CHI conference on human factors in computing systems extended abstracts (pp. 1–9). · DOI
  69. Razi, 2021, A human-centered systematic literature review of the computational approaches for online sexual risk detection, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 5, 1, 10.1145/3479609 · DOI · Paper page
  70. Razi, A., Kim, S., Choudhury, M. D., & Wisniewski, P. (2019). Ethical considerations for adolescent online risk detection AI systems. In Good systems: ethical AI for CSCW (the 22nd ACM conference on computer-supported cooperative work and social computing).
  71. Reisch, 2017, Beyond carrots and sticks: Europeans support health nudges, Food Policy, 69, 1, 10.1016/j.foodpol.2017.01.007 · DOI
  72. Ringland, K. E., Wolf, C. T., Dombrowski, L., & Hayes, G. R. (2015). Making” safe” community-centered practices in a virtual world dedicated to children with autism. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 1788–1800). · DOI
  73. Rocheleau, 2022, Privacy and safety on social networking sites: Autistic and non-autistic teenagers’ attitudes and behaviors, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 29, 1, 10.1145/3469859 · DOI
  74. Schaub, F., Balebako, R., Durity, A. L., & Cranor, L. F. (2015). A design space for effective privacy notices. In Eleventh symposium on usable privacy and security (SOUPS 2015) (pp. 1–17).
  75. Schoenebeck, 2020, Reimagining social media governance: Harm, accountability, and repair, Yale Journal of Law Techology, 23, 113
  76. Snakenborg, 2011, Cyberbullying: Prevention and intervention to protect our children and youth, Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55, 88, 10.1080/1045988X.2011.539454 · DOI
  77. Story, P., Smullen, D., Acquisti, A., Cranor, L. F., Sadeh, N., & Schaub, F. (2020). From intent to action: Nudging users towards secure mobile payments. In Sixteenth symposium on usable privacy and security (pp. 379–415).
  78. Taylor, 2019, Accountability and empathy by design: Encouraging bystander intervention to cyberbullying on social media, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3, 1, 10.1145/3359323 · DOI
  79. Tekinbaş, 2021, Designing for youth-centered moderation and community governance in minecraft, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 28, 1, 10.1145/3450290 · DOI
  80. Thun, 2022, CyberAid: Are your children safe from cyberbullying?, Journal of King Saud University-Computer and Information Sciences, 34, 4099, 10.1016/j.jksuci.2021.03.001 · DOI
  81. TikTok, 2022, How to use parental controls on YouTube, tiktok, instagram and snapchat, The Wall Street Journal
  82. Van der Hof, 2011, Adolescents and cybercrime: Navigating between freedom and control, Policy & Internet, 3, 1, 10.2202/1944-2866.1121 · DOI
  83. Van Royen, 2015, Automatic monitoring of cyberbullying on social networking sites: From technological feasibility to desirability, Telematics and Informatics, 32, 89, 10.1016/j.tele.2014.04.002 · DOI
  84. Van Royen, 2017, “Thinking before posting?” reducing cyber harassment on social networking sites through a reflective message, Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 345, 10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.040 · DOI
  85. Vaterlaus, 2014, “They always ask what i’m doing and who i’m talking to”: Parental mediation of adolescent interactive technology use, Marriage & Family Review, 50, 691, 10.1080/01494929.2014.938795 · DOI
  86. Vishwamitra, N., Zhang, X., Tong, J., Hu, H., Luo, F., Kowalski, R., et al. (2017). MCDefender: Toward effective cyberbullying defense in mobile online social networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM on international workshop on security and privacy analytics (pp. 37–42). · DOI
  87. Wang, Y., Leon, P. G., Acquisti, A., Cranor, L. F., Forget, A., & Sadeh, N. (2014). A field trial of privacy nudges for facebook. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2367–2376). · DOI
  88. Wang, Y., Leon, P. G., Scott, K., Chen, X., Acquisti, A., & Cranor, L. F. (2013). Privacy nudges for social media: an exploratory Facebook study. In Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on world wide web (pp. 763–770). · DOI
  89. Williams-Ceci, 2021, Combating sharenting: Interventions to alter parents’ attitudes toward posting about their children online, Computers in Human Behavior, 125, 10.1016/j.chb.2021.106939 · DOI
  90. Wisniewski, 2018, The privacy paradox of adolescent online safety: A matter of risk prevention or risk resilience?, IEEE Security & Privacy, 16, 86, 10.1109/MSP.2018.1870874 · DOI
  91. Wisniewski, P., Jia, H., Wang, N., Zheng, S., Xu, H., Rosson, M. B., et al. (2015). Resilience mitigates the negative effects of adolescent internet addiction and online risk exposure. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 4029–4038). · DOI
  92. Wisniewski, P., Xu, H., Rosson, M. B., Perkins, D. F., & Carroll, J. M. (2016). Dear diary: Teens reflect on their weekly online risk experiences. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3919–3930). · DOI
  93. Xiao, S., Cheshire, C., & Salehi, N. (2022). Sensemaking, support, safety, retribution, transformation: A restorative justice approach to understanding adolescents’ needs for addressing online harm. In Proceedings of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 1–15). · DOI
  94. Ybarra, 2009, Associations between blocking, monitoring, and filtering software on the home computer and youth-reported unwanted exposure to sexual material online, Child Abuse & Neglect, 33, 857, 10.1016/j.chiabu.2008.09.015 · DOI · Paper page
  95. Young, 2022, Autonomy vs. control: Associations among parental mediation, perceived parenting styles, and US adolescents’ risky online experiences, Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 16, 10.5817/CP2022-2-5 · DOI
  96. Zarouali, 2017, “Do you like cookies?” adolescents’ skeptical processing of retargeted facebook-ads and the moderating role of privacy concern and a textual debriefing, Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 157, 10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.050 · DOI
  97. Zhao, 2021, Using environmental nudges to reduce academic cheating in young children, Developmental Science, 24, 10.1111/desc.13108 · DOI
  98. Zimmerman, 2013, Resiliency theory: A strengths-based approach to research and practice for adolescent health, Health Education & Behavior, 40, 381, 10.1177/1090198113493782 · DOI
  99. Zinkus, M., Curry, O., Moore, M., Peterson, Z., & Wood, Z. J. (2019). Fakesbook: A social networking platform for teaching security and privacy concepts to secondary school students. In Proceedings of the 50th ACM technical symposium on computer science education (pp. 892–898). · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Agha, Z., Ali, N. S., Park, J., & Wisniewski, P. J.
ORCID
Agha, Zainab
Venue
International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2025-03
Volume
43
Pages
100702
ISSN
2212-8689
DOI
10.1016/j.ijcci.2024.100702
Cited by
14
References
11
Language
en
Licence
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (IIS-2333207)
  • William T Grant Foundation Inc (187941)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review