Cited by 16Literacy, Media, and EducationMisinformation and Its ImpactsEducational Strategies and Epistemologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Fostering Media Literacy in the Age of AI: Examining the Impact on Digital Citizenship and Ethical Decision-Making

Open access
Hristovska, Aleksandra·2023·KAIROS: Media and Communications Review

Abstract

In today's interconnected and technology-driven world, examining the impact of artificial intelligence and digital media on individuals' understanding and engagement with information is imperative. This research aims to explore the intersection between these mediums and investigate the role of the media literacy education in the context of AI and the digital media. By doing so, the study seeks to understand how promoting critical thinking and ethical awareness can enhance individuals' abilities to navigate the digital landscape responsibly. The research questions explore how the media literacy education contributes to the critical thinking skills and ethical decision-making among individuals interacting with AI-driven media, the potential risks and challenges associated with AI in creating and spreading disinformation, and how the media literacy interventions can mitigate these risks. The methodology for this research will be divided into three parts. The first includes a literature review to examine existing research on media literacy, AI, digital citizenship, ethical decision-making, and analysis of case studies. The second incorporates online surveys with individuals, to assess their media literacy levels, critical thinking abilities, and ethical awareness. The third part employs an experimental approach, involving the creation and dissemination of a simulated fake news article generated by AI. The goal is to observe and analyse the reaction of the individuals, and the extent of fact-checking conducted in response. Expected outcomes include identifying the impact of the media literacy education on critical thinking, ethical decision-making, and digital citizenship in the context of AI-driven media, understanding risks and challenges posed by AI in disinformation creation and spread, highlighting the relationship between the media education and the civic engagement, addressing ethical considerations and proposing AI integration guidelines for media literacy education, and offering recommendations for enhancing and sustaining media literacy initiatives amidst rapid AI advancements.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.64370/iabm8423

Cites

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 16

Metadata

Authors
Hristovska, A.
Corresponding author
Hristovska, Aleksandra
Venue
KAIROS: Media and Communications Review
Published
2023-12-14
Volume
2
Issue
2
Pages
39-59
ISSN
2955-1927 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4413265030
Cited by
16
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 1
FWCI
43.80
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • KAIROS Media and Communication Review (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Social Science Open Access Repository (GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Literacy, Media, and Education
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Strategies and Epistemologies
Keywords
media literacy education, artificial intelligence, digital citizenship, ethical decision-making, critical thinking, disinformation, fact-checking, citizen participation

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