Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40741316›Full record

ArticleAsian bioethics review2025

Who Cares How Information Feels? A Call for Digital Influence Literacy.

Theresa M Senft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asian bioethics review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Theresa M SenftDepartment of Media, Communications, Creative Arts, Language, & Literature (MCCALL), Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3632-0466

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article introduces digital influence literacy, arguing for its inclusion in programs devoted to lessening the spread of health misinformation online. Influence literacy can be roughly understood as the capacity to recognise, analyse, navigate, and emotionally regulate feeling as it is generated, circulated and monetized over digital platforms, alternately experienced by social media users as mood, movement, sentiment, or environmental vibe. Combining insights from communications, social and behavioural psychology, digital design, and trauma studies, influence literacy can be used to better understand events like #FilmYourHospital, where a single rumour on Twitter wound up feeding into a global conspiracy. It can also be used to better appreciate how trends, memes, challenges, and calls for justice move from online spaces to offline ones. After arguing that traditional media literacy's assumptions about the value of emotional communication require substantial re-thinking in the age of platforms, this article lays the groundwork for topics that might be included in discussions on influence, moving from psycho-social theories of feeling to techno-social operations like emotion recognition, sentiment mining, persuasive computing and emotion optimization on platforms. To assist those looking to add influence literacy to classrooms, a teaching framework called the Influence Ecosphere is offered, with discussion topics suggested to help supplement media literacy's traditional focus on rights with a feeling-based ethics of care.

Indexed as

Digital influence literacyDigital platformsMedia literacy

Identifiers

PMID40741316
PMCPMC12304360

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.