Three diverse motives for information sharing

Knowledge is distributed over many individuals. Thus, humans are tasked with informing one another for the betterment of all. But as information can alter people's action, affect and cognition in both positive and negative ways, deciding whether to share information can be a particularly difficult problem. Here, we examine how people integrate potentially conflicting consequences of knowledge, to decide whether to inform others. We show that participants (Exp1: N = 114, Pre-registered replication: N = 102) use their own information-seeking preferences to solve complex information-sharing decisions. In particular, when deciding whether to inform others, participants consider the usefulness of information in directing action, its valence and the receiver's uncertainty level, and integrate these assessments into a calculation of the value of information that explains information sharing decisions. A cluster analysis revealed that participants were clustered into groups based on the different weights they assign to these three factors. Within individuals, the relative influence of each of these factors was stable across information-seeking and information-sharing decisions. These results suggest that people put themselves in a receiver position to determine whether to inform others and can help predict when people will share information.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Communications Psychology
Published
2024-11-06
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s44271-024-00144-y
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.53

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Three diverse motives for information sharing

Moshe Glickman, Tali Sharot, Valentina Vellani
4 citations
Communications Psychology
Misinformation and Its Impacts
4.53
article

Three diverse motives for information sharing

Moshe Glickman, Tali Sharot, Valentina Vellani
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Knowledge is distributed over many individuals. Thus, humans are tasked with informing one another for the betterment of all. But as information can alter people's action, affect and cognition in both positive and negative ways, deciding whether to share information can be a particularly difficult problem. Here, we examine how people integrate potentially conflicting consequences of knowledge, to decide whether to inform others. We show that participants (Exp1: N = 114, Pre-registered replication: N = 102) use their own information-seeking preferences to solve complex information-sharing decisions. In particular, when deciding whether to inform others, participants consider the usefulness of information in directing action, its valence and the receiver's uncertainty level, and integrate these assessments into a calculation of the value of information that explains information sharing decisions. A cluster analysis revealed that participants were clustered into groups based on the different weights they assign to these three factors. Within individuals, the relative influence of each of these factors was stable across information-seeking and information-sharing decisions. These results suggest that people put themselves in a receiver position to determine whether to inform others and can help predict when people will share information.

Communications PsychologyVol. 2(1)
Max Planck Institute for Biology of Ageing (DE), University College London (GB), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
Wellcome Trust
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
4.53
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.