This study delves into the influence of clickbait types (hyperbole, insinuation, visual rhetoric, and puzzle) and structures (emotion-label and emotion-laden words) on user cognitive and emotional responses in an online environment. Using electroencephalography with 32 internet-experienced participants, we analyzed how these different clickbait configurations affect engagement and processing. Our findings highlight that clickbait types such as hyperbole and visual rhetoric swiftly capture attention and enhance emotional engagement, whereas insinuative and puzzling clickbait demand more cognitive effort and deeper processing. In addition, the structure of emotional words significantly influences user responses; emotion-laden words facilitate quicker cognitive processing and enhance emotional reactions, particularly in contexts involving negative emotions. These insights offer valuable implications for content creators and marketers in strategizing ethical clickbait usage, aiming to balance user engagement with information integrity. This research contributes to a nuanced understanding of the interplay between content presentation and user perception, providing a foundation for future explorations into ethical digital content practices.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoltonDM, YaxleyJ. Fake news and clickbait—natural enemies of evidence-based medicine. BJU Int, 2017; 119 (Suppl 5):8–9; doi: 10.1111/bju.13883
2.
MareeC. Introduction to the Language and Global Media Special Issue. Discourse Context Media, 2019; 32:100342; doi: 10.1016/j.dcm.2019.100342
3.
ZhengJ, LeeDKC. Understanding the evolution of the internet: Web1.0 to web3.0, web3 and web 3 plus. 2023; doi: 10.2139/ssrn.4431284
4.
ShresthaA, BehfarA, Al-AmeenMN. “It is luring you to click on the link with false advertising”—mental models of clickbait and its impact on user’s perceptions and behavior towards clickbait warnings. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2024; 1–19; doi: 10.1080/10447318.2024.2323248
5.
WuJ, GanW, ChenZ, et al.AI-Generated Content (AIGC): A Survey. 2023.
6.
GrahamMH, HillygusDS, TrexlerA. Misleading polls in the media: Does survey clickbait have social consequences? Public Opinion Quarterly, 2024; 88(2):315–336; doi: 10.1093/poq/nfae009
7.
NathK, DharS, BasishthaS. Web 1.0 to Web 3.0 - Evolution of the Web and Its Various Challenges. In: 2014 International Conference on Reliability Optimization and Information Technology (ICROIT) IEEE, Faridabad, Haryana, India, 2014, pp. 86–89; doi: 10.1109/ICROIT.2014.6798297
8.
YangD, ChenJ, YangZ, et al.Let’s Make Your Request More Persuasive: Modeling Persuasive Strategies via Semi-Supervised Neural Nets on Crowdfunding Platforms. In: Proceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 1 (Long and Short Papers), 2019, pp. 3620–3630.
9.
MungerK, LucaM, NaglerJ, et al.The (null) effects of clickbait headlines on polarization, trust, and learning. Public Opinion Quarterly, 2020; 84(1):49–73.
10.
KaushalV, VemuriK. Clickbait—trust and credibility of digital news. IEEE Trans Technol Soc, 2021; 2(3):146–154.
11.
MolyneuxL, CoddingtonM. Aggregation, clickbait and their effect on perceptions of journalistic credibility and quality. Journalism Pract., 2020; 14(4):429–446; doi: 10.1080/17512786.2019.1628658
12.
ZhangM, WuH, HuangY, et al.Negative news headlines are more attractive: Negativity bias in online news reading and sharing. Curr Psychol, 2024; doi: 10.1007/s12144-024-06646-6
13.
EckerUK, LewandowskyS, ChangEP, et al.The effects of subtle misinformation in news headlines. J Exp Psychol Appl, 2014; 20(4):323–335; doi: 10.1037/xap0000028
14.
GeorgesV, CourtemancheF, SénécalS, et al.The Adoption of Physiological Measures as an Evaluation Tool in UX. In: HCI in Business, Government and Organizations. Interacting with Information Systems. (NahFFH, TanCH eds) Springer International Publishing: Cham, 2017, pp. 90–98; doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-58481-2_8
15.
BiyaniP, TsioutsiouliklisK, BlackmerJ. “8 amazing secrets for getting more clicks”: detecting clickbaits in news streams using article informality. AAAI, 2016; 30(1); doi: 10.1609/aaai.v30i1.9966
16.
CarcioppoloN, LunD, McFarlaneSJ. Exaggerated and questioning clickbait headlines and their influence on media learning. J Media Psychol, 2022; 34(1):30–41; doi: 10.1027/1864-1105/a000298
17.
ZhangW, DuW, BianY, et al.Seeing is not always believing: An exploratory study of clickbait in WeChat. Intr, 2020; 30(3):1043–1058; doi: 10.1108/INTR-09-2019-0373
18.
HuttoCJ, GilbertE. VADER: A parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. 2014; doi: 10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14550
19.
AbendR, De VoogdL, SaleminkE, et al.Association between attention bias to threat and anxiety symptoms in children and adolescents. Depress Anxiety, 2018; 35(3):229–238; doi: 10.1002/da.22706
20.
HofmannMJ, KuchinkeL, TammS, et al.Affective processing within 1/10th of a second: High arousal is necessary for early facilitative processing of negative but not positive words. Cognitive, Affective. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci, 2009; 9(4):389–397; doi: 10.3758/9.4.389
21.
KnickerbockerF, JohnsonRL, StarrEL, et al.The time course of processing emotion-laden words during sentence reading: Evidence from eye movements. Acta Psychol (Amst), 2019; 192:1–10; doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.10.008
22.
ZhangJ, WuC, YuanZ, et al.Differentiating emotion-label words and emotion-laden words in emotion conflict: An ERP study. Exp Brain Res, 2019; 237(9):2423–2430; doi: 10.1007/s00221-019-05600-4
23.
BazacoA, RedondoM, Sanchez-GarciaP. Clickbait as a strategy of viral journalism: Conceptualisation and methods. Rev Lat Comun Soc, 2019; 74(1):94–115; doi: 10.4185/RLCS-2019-1323
24.
PekrunR. Emotions in reading and learning from texts: Progress and open problems. Discl Process, 2022; 59(1–2):116–125; doi: 10.1080/0163853X.2021.1938878
25.
DuB, JiaS, ZhouX, et al.The priming effect of emotional words on body expressions: Two ERP studies. Int J Psychophysiol, 2024; 202:112370; doi: 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2024.112370
26.
HanwenSHI, YutongLI, XueSUI. Effects of emotional word types: Behavioral and neural evidence for discrimination between emotion-label and emotion-laden words. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022; 30(12):2696; doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.02696
27.
KazanasSA, AltarribaJ. The automatic activation of emotion and emotion-laden words: Evidence from a masked and unmasked priming paradigm. Am J Psychol, 2015; 128(3):323–336; doi: 10.5406/amerjpsyc.128.3.0323
28.
GaoC, RenJ, SakakiM, et al.Memory enhancement for emotional words is attributed to both valence and arousal. Acta Psychol (Amst), 2024; 246:104249; doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2024.104249
29.
WuC, ZhangJ, YuanZ. Affective picture processing is modulated by emotion word type in masked priming paradigm: An event-related potential study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2020; 32(3):287–297; doi: 10.1080/20445911.2020.1745816
30.
PengK-C, ChenT, SadovnikA, et al.A Mixed Bag of Emotions: Model, Predict, and Transfer Emotion Distributions. In: 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cvpr) IEEE, New York, 2015, pp. 860–868.
31.
PengnateSF, ChenJ, YoungA. Effects of clickbait headlines on user responses: An empirical investigation. J. Int. Technol. Inf. Manage., 2021; 30(3):1–18; doi: 10.58729/1941-6679.1440
32.
PengZ, Khatin-ZadehO. Research on metaphor processing during the past five decades: A bibliometric analysis. Humanit Soc Sci Commun, 2023; 10(1):1–13.
33.
PreteG, CroceP, ZappasodiF, et al.Exploring brain activity for positive and negative emotions by means of EEG microstates. Sci Rep, 2022; 12(1):3404.
34.
PotterMC, WybleB, HagmannCE, et al.Detecting meaning in RSVP at 13 ms per picture. Atten Percept Psychophys, 2014; 76(2):270–279; doi: 10.3758/s13414-013-0605-z
35.
ThorpeS, FizeD, MarlotC. Speed of processing in the human visual system. Nat., 1996; 381(6582):520–522; doi: 10.1038/381520a0
36.
LiX, ZhouJ, XiangH, et al.Attention Grabbing through Forward Reference: An ERP Study on Clickbait and Top News Stories. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact., 2022; 40(11):3014–3029; doi: 10.1080/10447318.2022.2158262
37.
ZhangY, XuH, ZhaoY, et al.Application of the P300 potential in cognitive impairment assessments after transient ischemic attack or minor stroke. Neurol Res, 2021; 43(4):336–341; doi: 10.1080/01616412.2020.1866245
38.
PavariniSCI, BrigolaAG, LuchesiBM, et al.On the use of the P300 as a tool for cognitive processing assessment in healthy aging: A review. Dement Neuropsychol, 2018; 12(1):1–11; doi: 10.1590/1980-57642018dn12-010001
39.
LiuX, MaJ, WangN. Visual Cortex. In: Optic Disorders and Visual Field. (WangN, LiuX, FanN. eds) Advances in Visual Science and Eye Diseases Springer: Singapore, 2019, pp. 33–36; doi: 10.1007/978-981-13-2502-1_7
40.
FitousiD, WengerMJ. Processing capacity under perceptual and cognitive load: A closer look at load theory. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 2011; 37(3):781–798; doi: 10.1037/a0020675
41.
AltarribaJ, Basnight-BrownDM. The representation of emotion vs. emotion-laden words in English and Spanish in the affective Simon task, 2011. 2010. Available from: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1367006910379261 [Last accessed: November26, 2022].
42.
YanagisawaH, MikamiN. Effects of Expectation Uncertainty and Surprise on Quality Perception Factors of Expectation Effect. In: Volume 1A: 34th Computers and Information in Engineering Conference American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Buffalo, New York, USA, 2014, p. V01AT02A086; doi: 10.1115/DETC2014-34458
43.
LangeslagSJE. Electrophysiological correlates of romantic love: A review of EEG and ERP studies with beloved-related stimuli. Brain Sci, 2022; 12(5):551; doi: 10.3390/brainsci12050551
SchindlerS, VormbrockR, HelmingH, et al.Dissociating different temporal stages of emotional word processing by feature-based attention. Sci Rep, 2023; 13(1):16860; doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-43794-4
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
