THE DIGITAL LITERACY PARADOX: GEN Z, INFORMATION OVERCONFIDENCE, AND THE EROSION OF TRUST IN SCIENTIFIC AUTHORITY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36526/sosioedukasi.v15i3.8880Keywords:
Generation Z; digital literacy; overconfidence; post-truth; misinformation; trust in science;Abstract
Generation Z is widely perceived as digitally competent, yet extensive access to information does not necessarily translate into critical evaluation skills. This systematic literature review examines the digital literacy paradox—the gap between perceived and actual information literacy—and its implications for trust in scientific authority. Following the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, literature published between 2015 and 2026 was identified from six databases. Of 1,226 records, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria for thematic synthesis. The review identifies four findings: assumptions of innate digital competence lack consistent empirical support; perceived literacy often exceeds actual competence, reflecting the Dunning–Kruger effect and the illusion of knowledge from online search; platform-driven information practices encourage reliance on non-authoritative sources; and interventions based on critical digital literacy, lateral reading, and psychological inoculation remain underdeveloped in Indonesia. The review concludes that declining trust in science is fundamentally a metacognitive and epistemic challenge requiring educational approaches that foster intellectual humility.
References
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211
Barton, C. C. (2019). Critical literacy in the post-truth media landscape. Policy Futures in Education, 17(8), 1024–1037. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478210319831569
boyd, d. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press. https://doi.org/10.12987/9780300166439
Breakstone, J., Smith, M., Wineburg, S., Rapaport, A., Carle, J., Garland, M., & Saavedra, A. (2021). Students’ civic online reasoning: A national portrait. Educational Researcher, 50(8), 505–515. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X211017495
Chouraqui, F. (2026). What post-truth politics does to the belief-desire model. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour. Advance online publication.
CNN Indonesia. (2021, December 15). Penjelasan dokter soal isu GERD sebabkan kematian [Doctor’s explanation on the claim that GERD causes death]. https://www.cnnindonesia.com/gaya-hidup/20211215184030-255-734564/penjelasan-dokter-soal-isu-gerd-sebabkan-kematian
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y
Farkas, J., & Schou, J. (2020). Post-truth, fake news and democracy: Mapping the politics of falsehood. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429317347
Fisher, M., Goddu, M. K., & Keil, F. C. (2015). Searching for explanations: How the internet inflates estimates of internal knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(3), 674–687. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000070
Gignac, G. E., & Zajenkowski, M. (2020). The Dunning-Kruger effect is (mostly) a statistical artefact: Valid approaches to testing the hypothesis with individual differences data. Intelligence, 80, Article 101449. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101449
Guess, A. M., Lerner, M., Lyons, B., Montgomery, J. M., Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., & Sircar, N. (2020). A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(27), 15536–15545. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1920498117
Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “net generation.” Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x
Hassoun, A., Beacock, I., Consolvo, S., Goldberg, B., Kelley, P. G., & Russell, D. M. (2023). Practicing information sensibility: How Gen Z engages with online information. Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581328
Kahan, D. M. (2013). Ideology, motivated reasoning, and cognitive reflection. Judgment and Decision Making, 8(4), 407–424. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1930297500005271
Komara, D. A., & Widjaya, S. N. (2024). Memahami perilaku informasi Gen-Z dan strategi melawan disinformasi: Sebuah tinjauan literatur penggunaan media sosial [Understanding Gen Z’s information behavior and strategies against disinformation: A literature review of social media use]. Jurnal Pustaka Ilmiah, 10(2), 155–174. https://doi.org/10.20961/jpi.v10i2.85775
Kruger, J., & Dunning, D. (1999). Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1121–1134. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.77.6.1121
Kyrychenko, Y., Koo, H. J., Maertens, R., Roozenbeek, J., van der Linden, S., & Götz, F. M. (2025). Profiling misinformation susceptibility. Personality and Individual Differences, 241, Article 113177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2025.113177
Le, T.-T. T., Nguyen, H., Le, M.-C., Vo, M.-X., Pham, T.-Q., Ho, M.-T., & Nguyen, H.-K. T. (2026). A Bayesian analysis of determinants of open science utilization among Gen Z students in Vietnamese universities challenges digital native assumptions. Discover Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-026-01667-8
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008
Lyons, B. A., Montgomery, J. M., Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2021). Overconfidence in news judgments is associated with false news susceptibility. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(23), Article e2019527118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2019527118
Ma, S., & Chen, C. (2023). Are digital natives overconfident in their privacy literacy? Discrepancy between self-assessed and actual privacy literacy, and their impacts on privacy protection behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1224168. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1224168
McIntyre, L. (2018). Post-truth. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11483.001.0001
Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Robertson, C. T., Ross Arguedas, A., & Nielsen, R. K. (2024). Reuters Institute digital news report 2024. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. https://doi.org/10.60625/RISJ-VY6N-4V57
Nichols, T. (2017). The death of expertise: The campaign against established knowledge and why it matters. Oxford University Press.
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pariser, E. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press.
Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(5), 388–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007
Podara, A., Saridou, T., Kostarella, I., Georgiadou, E., & Veglis, A. (2025). Talking to Gen Z about media and pseudoscience: Trends and perceptions. Societies, 15(6), Article 148. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc15060148
Prasad, A. (2022). Anti-science misinformation and conspiracies: COVID-19, post-truth, and science & technology studies (STS). Science, Technology & Society, 27(1), 88–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/09717218211003413
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019). Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications, 5, Article 65. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9
RRI. (2026, January). GERD ramai dibicarakan, dokter tegaskan bukan penyebab kematian [GERD widely discussed; doctors affirm it is not a cause of death]. Radio Republik Indonesia. https://rri.co.id/ambon/kesehatan/2149060/about.html
Saito, K., Trofimovich, P., Abe, M., & In’nami, Y. (2020). Dunning-Kruger effect in second language speech learning: How does self-perception align with other-perception over time? Learning and Individual Differences, 79, Article 101849. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101849
Scheufele, D. A., & Krause, N. M. (2019). Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 116(16), 7662–7669. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1805871115
Soefijanto, T. A. (2025). Media shifting: A study of Generation Z’s preferences on television and digital platforms. KOMUNIKA: Jurnal Dakwah dan Komunikasi, 19(2).
Sunstein, C. R. (2017). #Republic: Divided democracy in the age of social media. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400884711
van der Linden, S. (2022). Misinformation: Susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public. Nature Medicine, 28(3), 460–467. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559
Wineburg, S., & McGrew, S. (2019). Lateral reading and the nature of expertise: Reading less and learning more when evaluating digital information. Teachers College Record, 121(11), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811912101102
.png)
