We’re presenting this to make you, our readers aware, how people use headlines to trick your psych into reading mindless and useless articles in hoping you’ll be more mindful of what you click on.
While clickbait can increase the amount of attention a specific article is receiving, it also decrease the trust in the source. Probably because the content is usually not to expectations relative to the headline, leaving the source with the reputation of being scammy.
Published in PLOS One from University of Duisburg-Essen, researchers reviewed 4,000 Facebook posts from “reputable” and “tabloid” sources in 2017 over seven consecutive days analyzing how headlines bait users into clicking their articles. While it is a different environment today, in 2017, Facebook was the top of the food chain in social media and where people get the majority of their news.
They found several insights into the characteristics of clickbait headlines:
- Unusual punctuations was associated 2.5 times more reactions, shares, and comments.
- Questions or post text were not associated with increased interaction
- Longer words in headlines lead to decreased post interaction. However, longer words in the post text lead to more engagement.
- Doubling the number of words in the headline led to about 24% fewer comments, but no difference in reactions or shares. However, doubling the word count in the post text lead to increased engagement.
- Common clickbait phrases in the headline, such as “this will blow your mind”, led to a loss of 25% of reactions, shares, and comments compared to similar posts without such phrases in the headline.
- Positive tone of headlines increased comments while negative wording in the posts can lead to increases in comments.
When our minds are lost and dissociated from internet usage, we may be more vulnerable to clickbait tactics, leading to more time wasted on the internet.
AK Jung et al. Click me…! The influence of clickbait on user engagement in social media and the role of digital nudging. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266743
