The practice of microtargeting in politics, involving tailoring persuasive messages to individuals based on personal vulnerabilities, has raised manipulation concerns. As microtargeting's persuasive benefits are well-established and its use facilitated by AI tools and personality-inference models, ethical and regulatory concerns arise.Here, we explore countering microtargeting effects by creating a warning signal deployed when users encounter personality-tailored political ads. Two studies evaluated the effectiveness of warning "popups'' against potential microtargeting by comparing persuasiveness of targeted vs. non-targeted messages with and without popups.Using within subject-designs, Studies 1 (N = 666) and 2 (N = 432) reveal a targeting effect, with targeted ads deemed more persuasive than non-targeted ones. More importantly, the presence of a warning popup did not significantly impact persuasiveness. Overall, across the two studies, personality-targeted ads were significantly more persuasive than non-targeted ones, and this advantage persisted despite warnings. Given the focus on transparency in initiatives like the EU's AI Act, the lack of a significant transparency measure effect is potentially concerning.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carrella et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: