Influencing recommendation algorithms to reduce the spread of unreliable news by encouraging humans to fact-check articles, in a field experiment.

Society often relies on social algorithms that adapt to human behavior. Yet scientists struggle to generalize the combined behavior of mutually-adapting humans and algorithms. This scientific challenge is a governance problem when algorithms amplify human responses to falsehoods. Could attempts to influence humans have second-order effects on algorithms? Using a large-scale field experiment, I test if influencing readers to fact-check unreliable sources causes news aggregation algorithms to promote or lessen the visibility of those sources. Interventions encouraged readers to fact-check articles or fact-check and provide votes to the algorithm. Across 1104 discussions, these encouragements increased human fact-checking and reduced vote scores on average. The fact-checking condition also caused the algorithm to reduce the promotion of articles over time by as much as -25 rank positions on average, enough to remove an article from the front page. Overall, this study offers a path for the science of human-algorithm behavior by experimentally demonstrating how influencing collective human behavior can also influence algorithm behavior.