Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
This report is the second output from the Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) Enlightenment 2.0 multi-annual research programme. The work started with the classical Enlightenment premise that reason is the primary source of political authority and legitimacy. Recognising that advances in behavioural, decision and social sciences demonstrate that we are not purely rational beings, we sought to understand the other drivers that influence political decision-making. The first output “Understanding our political nature: how to put knowledge and reason at the heart of policymaking” published in 20191, addressed some of the most pressing political issues of our age. However, some areas that we consider crucial to providing an updated scientific model of the drivers of political decision-making were not fully addressed. One of them is the impact of our contemporary digital information space on the socio-psychological mechanisms of opinion formation, decision-making and political behaviour. The JRC, together with a team of renowned experts addresses this knowledge deficit in a report that synthesises the knowledge about digital technology, democracy and human behaviour to enable policymakers to safeguard a participatory and democratic European future through legislation that aligns with human thinking and behaviour in a digital context. It is hoped that this report will prove useful as policymakers reflect upon the forthcoming European Democracy Action Plan, the Digital Services Act, the EU Citizenship Report 2020, as well as on how to legislate against disinformation. The report has been written in spring/summer of 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic took hold of Europe and the world. During this time, our democracies suffered while technology played a crucial role in keeping societies functioning in times of lockdown. From remote distance education to teleworking, religious services to staying in touch with family and friends, for many but not all, everyday activities moved online. Additionally, technological applications and initiatives multiplied in an attempt to limit the spread of the disease, treat patients and facilitate the tasks of overworked essential personnel. Conversely, however, significant fundamental rights questions have been raised as unprecedented initiatives to track, trace and contain the pandemic using digital technologies have proven controversial. Governments invoking emergency measures in support of public health decision-making, used advanced analytics to collect, process and share data for effective front-line responses that lacked transparency and public consultation. When used as an information source, social media have been found to present a health risk that is partly due to their role as disseminators of health-related conspiracies, with non-English language speakers being at greater risk of exposure to misinformation during the crisis. It is likely that these technologies will have a long-lasting impact beyond COVID-19. Yet despite the immediacy of the crisis, the authors invite the reader to take a longer perspective on technology and democracy to get a deeper understanding of the interrelated nuances. In dark times, we seek to bring light to the importance of understanding the influence of online technologies on political behaviour and decision-making.
Lewandowsky et al. (Tue,) studied this question.