Cultivating Resilience through Writing: Writing as a Strategy to Curb the Spread of Disinformation
By Megan Gisclon. Originally published in the first 2024 issue of the journal of the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Abstract
As the current threat landscape continues to widen, NATO, member state governments, societies, and individuals must develop creative, evergreen strategies to build resilience to tomorrow’s threats. The threats posed by disinformation are of particular concern as the spread of disinformation has become more rapid, widespread, and sophisticated as societies have cemented our constant connection to information spaces, and NATO’s adversaries have caught on to the effectiveness of deploying disinformation operations. In face of this threat, this article proposes developing individuals’ writing practices – a practice that has shown to help build the critical thinking skills needed to help process and assess messages – as an active strategy to help combat disinformation. This article briefly defines disinformation and the threats arising from it, examines current strategies to help curb disinformation, reviews the research on the benefits of writing, and presents recommendations for NATO on how to implement more writing-based exercises within the Alliance and in partner countries.
Keywords: disinformation, resilience, writing, NATO.
Introduction
In 2016, NATO adopted what it is has dubbed as a “360-degree” approach to security. This holistic approach – implying that NATO ought to be prepared to combat threats from every direction and in every domain – has become emblematic of the present security environment: an environment in which nearly all aspects of daily life can be securitized. This broader view of security not only necessitates that member state governments and the security sector reevaluate the current threat environment but also requires the whole of society, including individual citizens, to be prepared to tackle the emerging security threats that come our way. Given our near-constant connection to information spaces, this approach foremost includes the securitization of the messages that we hear and the content that we consume.
Faced with such rampant adversarial messaging, individuals, societies, member state governments, and NATO must work together to meet the challenges and threats posed by disinformation. As such messaging is highly fluid and can seemingly appear anywhere at any time, the strategies used to combat this threat must be proactive rather than reactive. Individuals must develop the skills to thoroughly process the information that they encounter.
To this end, this article proposes developing individuals’ writing practices – a practice that has shown to help build the critical thinking skills needed to help process whether messages are true or false – as an active strategy to help combat disinformation.
The Current Disinformation Landscape and Strategies for Building Resilience to It
According to NATO, disinformation is the “deliberate creation and dissemination of false or manipulated information with the intent to deceive or mislead.”[1] A key component of this definition is the element of intent, which differentiates disinformation from the often unintentional spread of false news or misinformation. While the threat of disinformation itself existed long before the so-called information age, the proliferation of the digital world and social media have made the dissemination of disinformation more rapid, widespread, and sophisticated. Furthermore, NATO’s adversaries have caught on to the effectiveness of deploying such strategies, including its low cost in both dollars and human lives. NATO has seen an uptick in disinformation operations across the Alliance since Russia’s illegal invasion of Crimea in 2014, forcing the Alliance to develop new responses to this (re-)emerging threat.[2]
How can we combat this threat? Traditional methods take ‘debunking’ or dispelling disinformation as the starting point for countering disinformation. Social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter have channeled significant human and financial resources into reviewing and in some cases removing posts that violate their terms of services regarding the dissemination of fake news. However, over time, traditional or defensive strategies of dispelling fake news have proven ineffective. Even after disproving fake news, research has shown that people are more likely to remember the original, factually incorrect story rather than the corrected story.[3] Thus, reactionary rather than preventative strategies do not solve the problem inherent to the spread of disinformation itself. Recent scholarship, therefore, suggests that policy makers must first tackle the reason behind the spread of disinformation: the fact that societies lack the ability to identify disinformation in the first place. This necessitates that member states and NATO develop novel and effective preventative approaches to countering disinformation rather than react to the strategies of its adversaries.
From a theoretical lens, two novel preventative methods to countering disinformation stand out in the policy discourse: the behavioral approach and “pre-bunking.” The more reactive of the two, the behavioral approach, relies on deploying strategies to leverage human psychology and behavior to stop the spread of disinformation. This approach is both preventative and reactionary: it can be seen as an ‘asymmetric’ response to disinformation that considers and responds to individuals’ cognitive bias and irrationality and can be leveraged to obtain information that can then be used to push or ‘nudge’ people away from believing in the disinformation they have consumed.[4] One related suggestion focusing on behavior is the use of AI to slow rather than censor or delete posts that spread disinformation. To this end, a team at Johns Hopkins University, in cooperation with Imperial College London and Georgia Institute of Technology, have been working on a natural language processing algorithm designed to pick up emotionally charged language used on social media – which, according to their research, is indicative of possible disinformation – and impose an arbitrary ‘cool-down period’ on such posts to slow reposting, commenting, and sharing in order to ultimately slow the spread of disinformation.[5] Such an approach not only considers human behavior but also arguably would promote a process of self-reflection by “slowing” thinking, as well.[6] Ideally, this would lead users to create fewer posts containing disinformation and, therefore, fewer posts that need to be removed by social media companies, the latter which in turn could be negatively translated as censorship by tech giants.
As a more preventative strategy, the idea of ‘pre-bunking’ has gained significant ground among security experts as a winning strategy to combat disinformation. In contrast to debunking, pre-bunking aims to get ahead of the spread of disinformation by educating individuals on how to spot disinformation and prevent its spread. This strategy has even gained ground within NATO, which claims that pre-bunking is part of its strategy to ‘engage’ with disinformation.[7] Perhaps the most pervasive of the studies that has put pre-bunking in the spotlight recently is the research from Cambridge University on the effects of inoculation theory on countering disinformation.[8] These studies posit that the effects of ‘injecting’ bits of disinformation, much like a medical vaccine, into individuals’ cognitive space can prevent the spread of the disinformation ‘virus’.[9] Initial research on the long-term effectiveness of this strategy posits that one ‘dose’ – in other words, an active exercise in which one is exposed to and forced to identify disinformation – can increase individuals’ skills in combatting disinformation for up to three months.[10] The study utilizes an online interactive game called the Bad News game in which participants are exposed to six strategies that are used to disseminate disinformation and then are asked to engage in deploying such strategies as a means to gain insights into how disinformation is spread.[11]
While engaging individuals in a highly specific game environment may be one method to helping member societies counter disinformation, the short-term nature of the effects of ‘inoculation’ requires us to seek additional practices or exercises that can help individuals cultivate a resistance to the effects of disinformation. In a follow-up study to the original conceptualization of the game, researchers found that this active nature of the game is a key component in participants’ learning. Looking toward alternative active approaches to sharpening our skills against disinformation, this article hypothesizes that the act of writing may be one simple method of developing the skills needed to combat disinformation.
Writing as a Strategy to Counter Disinformation
Similar to active participation in the Bad News game, writing as an active, cognitive exercise ought to be explored as a practice that can help stop the spread of disinformation.
The benefits of writing are well-established. Writing is one of the best ways to help individuals organize, retain, and cultivate information and new ideas. Countless studies have documented that writing improves cognitive functions, such as better memory, planning, and organization.[12] In newer studies, it is argued that writing helps to improve mental health and, in turn, immune function.[13] Studies in the field of psychology have found that establishing a daily writing practice of expressive writing helps individuals process difficult life experiences.[14] Writing helps improve communications skills, which in an era of constant communication, are vital for leaders’ survival and success.[15] With all these benefits and skills taken together, writing is an active, multi-faceted practice that helps develop skills that are important to cultivating more resilient individuals who in turn help build more resilient societies.
In the context of NATO, writing about transatlantic security can help individuals organize, retain, and cultivate information and new ideas relevant to the issues most pressing to international security, leading to more innovation, deeper thinking, and better leadership in this area. In the case of academic or policy writing, throughout the writing process individuals must undergo an extensive research process, fact-checking, and often a peerreview and editing process before reaching publication. Such an extensive process of reading, thinking, and discussion helps individuals acquire a better knowledge base and cultivate critical thinking skills, leading them to engage more critically with all sources of information, including mis- and disinformation. Similar to the Cambridge study of the Bad News game, such a process first builds exposure and then – following thorough, scientific research – resilience to such sources
While certainly more research as well as observational studies need to be carried out to test this hypothesis, this paper proposes this idea, i.e., cultivating resilience through establishing a writing practice, as a starting point for further research. Seeing that there are seemingly no adverse effects to furthering writing opportunities, this paper recommends that NATO develops additional avenues and activities that prompt more individuals to engage in writing exercises, such as developing additional NATO-run writing outlets, writing competitions, and support for external writing outlets related to transatlantic issues. All of these should be open to broad, inclusive audiences across the Alliance and in partner countries. A focus on youth participation could help develop such skills at a younger, more vulnerable age. Introducing a more extensive writing-based component into NATO-led competitions such as Model NATO, for example, could be one strategy toward this end. Furthermore, distinguishing young professionals as authorities on such issues through publishing their work in credible outlets would help to create a perspective new generation of informed, resilient leaders. By encouraging young professionals to engage in discussion and have their (written) voices heard, new leaders will emerge to inspire, influence, and mentor other young professionals, as well.
In the medium to long term, to reach even larger audiences who are not already engaged with NATO or those living in “alternative” information spaces, NATO can also work with member state and partner governments as well as NGOs working on related topics such as media literacy to help design curriculum for high school students that includes relevant writing components. While NATO can help develop such programs, these programs will effectively be run by national, state, or local educational offices who can alter the programs to meet local needs.
Conclusion
As the threats stemming from disinformation are only likely to increase in future, NATO and its member states need to be proactive in developing creative methods to build societal resilience to disinformation. Developing individuals’ writing practices throughout the Alliance and beyond may be one way forward in this endeavor. NATO, in cooperation with member state and partner country governments, should sponsor further research and broad-based programs on how writing contributes to resilience and can help curb the spread of disinformation in the long term.
Notes
[1] NATO, “Topic: NATO’s approach to countering disinformation,” last updated November 8, 2023, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_219728.htm.
[2] NATO, “Topic: NATO’s approach to countering disinformation,” last updated November 8, 2023, https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_219728.htm
[3] S Lewandowsky et al. “Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing,” Psychol Sci Public Interest 13, no. 3 (2012): 106–131, cited in Jon Roozenbeek and Sander van der Linden, “Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation,” Palgrave Communications 5, no. 65 (2019).
[4] Zdenek Rod, “Explaining disinformation? There’s a far better way to do that!” Atlantica magazine, Atlantic Forum, April 28, 2022, https://www.atlantic-forum.com/atlantica/explainingdisinformation-theres-a-far-better-way-to-do-that.
[5] Johns Hopkins University, Imperial College London, and Georgia Institute of Technology, “Countering disinformation: improving the Alliance’s digital resilience,” NATO Review, August 12, 2022, https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2021/08/12/countering-disinformation-improving-the-alliances-digital-resilience/index.html.
[6] This idea, according to the researchers in the aforementioned study, is in line with Nobel prize winner Daniel Kahneman’s work on Thinking Fast and Slow. See Daniel Kahneman, Thinking, Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2011).
[7] NATO, “Topic: NATO’s approach to countering disinformation.”
[8] Rakoen Maertens, Jon Roozenbeek, Melisa Basol, and Sander van der Linden, “Long-Term Effectiveness of Inoculation Against Misinformation: Three Longitudinal Experiments,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 27, no. 1 (2021): 1–16; M. Basol et al., “Good News about Bad News: Gamified Inoculation Boosts Confidence and Cognitive Immunity Against Fake News,” Journal of Cognition 3, no. 1 (2020): pp. 1–9; Roozenbeek and van der Linden, “Fake news game confers.”
[9] Research on applying the inoculation theory to the cognitive space was originally carried out by McGuire in the 1960s. See W.J. McGuire, “Resistance to persuasion conferred by active and passive prior refutation of the same and alternative counterarguments,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 63 (1961): pp. 326–332, cited in Maertens, Roozenbeek, Basol, and van der Linden, “Long-Term Effectiveness of Inoculation."
[10] Maertens, Roozenbeek, Basol, and van der Linden, “Long-Term Effectiveness of Inoculation.
[11] The game can be played here: https://www.getbadnews.com/books/english/. Participants at the Riga Conference Future Leaders Forum played this game as part of a workshop organized by the Atlantic Forum.
[12] MacArthur and Graham outline the develop of research on writing and the cognitive domain in their book chapter. See Charles A. MacArthur and Steve Graham, “Writing Research from a Cognitive Perspective,” in Handbook of Writing Research Second Edition, ed. Charles A. MacArthur, Steve Graham, and Jill Frit (New York: Guilford Publications, 2016), pp. 24–40.
[13] David Robson, “The big idea: can writing make you healthier?” The Guardian, April 24, 2023, https://www.theguardian.com/books/2023/apr/24/the-big-idea-can-writing-make-you-healthier.
[14] CM Stapleton, H Zhang, and JS Berman, “The Event-Specific Benefits of Writing About a Difficult Life Experience,” Eur J Psychol 17, no. 1 (2021): pp. 53–69; Chad Burton and Laura King, “Effects of (very) brief writing on health: The two-minute miracle,” Health Psychology 13, no. 1 (2008): pp. 9–14; Karen Baikie and Kay Wilhelm, “Emotional and physical health benefits of expressive writing,” Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 11, no. 5 (2005): pp. 338–346.
[15] Gregory Ciotti, “How Writing Makes You Happier, Smarter, and More Persuasive,” Psychology Today, August 4, 2014, https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/habits-not-hacks/201408/ how-writing-makes-you-happier-smarter-and-more-persuasive.
