A joint study demonstrates that brighter, more colorful fake posts capture user gaze faster, yet overall memory retention remains unaffected by surrounding visual contrast
▲ Figure 1. Examples of Focal Versus Surrounding Vividness Dominance in a Social Media Feed
The figure illustrates two conditions in which the relative visual vividness of a focal post and its surrounding posts is manipulated within a social media feed. In the Focal Vividness Dominance condition, the focal post is presented with greater visual vividness, such as higher color saturation and visual intensity, than the surrounding posts, making it relatively more salient within the feed. In the Surrounding Vividness Dominance condition, the surrounding posts are more visually vivid while the focal post is comparatively muted, making the focal post less visually prominent relative to its surrounding content. Thus, the manipulation captures how the relative visual contrast between a focal post and its feed context, rather than the focal content alone, can shape its perceptual salience.
A research team led by Professor Jiyoung Lee from the Department of Media and Communication in collaboration with international researchers, has uncovered how visual contrast across social media feeds influences how quickly users spot visual misinformation. Published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior, the findings demonstrate that when an online post is noticeably brighter and more colorful than neighboring content, people look at it significantly faster.
Every day, millions of people scroll through fast-moving social media timelines on apps like Instagram, encountering a mixture of photos, videos, and texts. While many believe fake news tricks people entirely through false words, deceptive images often play an even bigger role. Until now, most studies examined single misleading posts in complete isolation. The SKKU-led study took a fresh approach by examining how the surrounding visual environment—specifically the relative balance of color saturation across multiple posts—guides visual attention and memory.
To evaluate this effect under realistic conditions, the researchers monitored eye movements of participants as they scrolled through a mock social media feed. The team adjusted image saturation levels so that either the misinformation post stood out vividly against dull, black-and-white surrounding posts, or vibrant surrounding posts overshadowed a muted misinformation post.
The eye-tracking data revealed a decisive difference: users fixed their eyes on the fake post far more rapidly when it was visually dominant compared to neighboring items. However, this visual advantage had clear limits. Participants did not spend more total reading time on the vivid post, nor did they show improved recall of the misleading message later on. The early spark of attention was driven by automatic visual perception rather than deeper learning.
"When we scroll through our phones, our eyes naturally jump toward bright, vibrant colors before our brain even starts evaluating the content," explained Professor Jiyoung Lee. "These results remind us that fighting online misinformation requires looking beyond single posts. Social media platforms and digital literacy programs must also consider how feed design and visual contrast direct user attention."
This research provides crucial practical guidance for building safer digital spaces. By understanding how visual contrast operates, developers and media educators can design smarter interfaces that prevent deceptive content from exploiting basic visual habits, empowering younger generations to navigate digital feeds with greater awareness.
Advertisement
