In the rapidly evolving landscape of artificial intelligence, generative AI has emerged as a powerful yet double-edged tool in the battle against misinformation. Researchers from Uppsala University, in collaboration with colleagues from the University of Cambridge and the University of Western Australia, have conducted a systematic review that sheds light on the multifaceted roles AI can play within the information environment. Their comprehensive study, soon to be published in Behavioral Science & Policy, identifies seven distinct capacities of generative AI, each embodying unique potentials as well as inherent risks—a nuanced understanding that is critical in the age of rampant misinformation.
The study challenges the simplistic narratives that either hail AI as a panacea for informational integrity or condemn it as a harbinger of chaos. Instead, it adopts a Strategic SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analytical framework, allowing for a granular exploration of AI’s functions. This perspective reveals AI as a technology that simultaneously harnesses the ability to support fact-based communication while also possessing the capability to generate sophisticated falsehoods. This duality complicates how policymakers, educators, and digital platforms approach AI implementation, necessitating tailored strategies that address the particular risks associated with each identified role.
Central to the researchers’ findings is the delineation of seven roles—Informer, Guardian, Persuader, Integrator, Collaborator, Teacher, and Playmaker—that summarize how generative AI interacts with information dissemination and education. These roles provide a conceptual scaffold, illustrating the diverse ways AI modulates the flow and integrity of information across digital ecosystems. For example, as an Informer, AI can automate and enhance fact-checking processes, rapidly scanning vast troves of data for inconsistencies, thereby fortifying the information environment against false narratives. However, in its role as Persuader, the very same technology can craft pseudo-authentic content that sways public opinion through subtly embedded biases, demonstrating its potential for manipulation.
An important technical concern emphasized by the authors is the phenomenon of AI “hallucinations”—instances where the generative models produce outputs that are factually incorrect or misleading despite appearing confident and coherent. Such hallucinations present a significant challenge for users who rely on the technology for accurate information. The researchers argue that without proper human oversight and robust verification mechanisms, these erroneous outputs could proliferate misinformation rather than mitigate it. This highlights the imperative for AI systems to incorporate transparent accountability features and for end-users to develop AI literacy, enhancing their ability to critically assess AI-generated content.
The Guardian role underscores AI’s capacity to monitor and flag misinformation, serving as an autonomous sentry in the complex digital milieu. Here, algorithmic vigilance can identify emerging disinformation campaigns and signal communities or platforms for intervention. However, the risk of overreach or censorship looms, necessitating clear ethical frameworks to balance moderation with freedom of expression. The integration of AI monitoring tools into social and information networks must therefore be approached with caution, embedding safeguards against misuse and bias.
Conversely, as the Integrator and Collaborator, generative AI opens pathways for cooperative human-AI interaction, augmenting creativity, and collective problem-solving. These roles envision AI as a partner in generating new knowledge and educational content, enabling personalized learning and adaptive training. However, the researchers caution that excessive reliance on AI collaboration could inadvertently diminish critical thinking skills and knowledge acquisition, creating an intellectual complacency that leaves individuals more susceptible to misinformation. This potential downside demands ongoing scrutiny of how generative AI complements human cognition over time.
The Teacher role operates at the intersection of education and AI-driven content generation. By designing interactive learning environments and personalized educational interventions, AI has the prospect of revolutionizing pedagogy. Yet, this promise carries the risk of embedding inadvertent biases or inaccuracies in educational materials, particularly if the data underpinning AI models is skewed or incomplete. Ensuring that AI-driven education initiatives are rigorously validated and ethically grounded is paramount to prevent the inadvertent propagation of misconceptions to learners.
In framing these seven roles as a checklist, the research provides stakeholders with a pragmatic tool for discerning when and how different applications of AI should be implemented. This approach advocates for nuanced transparency regarding AI-generated content, differentiated based on the contextual function AI performs. Such transparency, alongside clearly defined boundaries and human oversight, becomes crucial in mitigating the inherent risks associated with AI’s dual-use nature.
The research team calls for immediate and concerted policy responses to address these challenges. Among their key recommendations are the establishment of regulatory frameworks that define acceptable uses of AI in sensitive information environments, mandating transparency standards regarding AI content generation and its limitations, ensuring human supervision where AI influences decision-making or moderation, and fostering widespread AI literacy to empower users in navigating AI’s outputs critically.
As generative AI technologies continue to advance at a breathtaking pace, the study underscores the urgency of ongoing evaluation and critical reflection on AI’s roles, particularly in educational and collaborative contexts. The balance between leveraging AI to strengthen democratic discourse and guarding against its potential to erode knowledge foundations is delicate and requires sustained vigilance by researchers, policymakers, educators, and the public alike.
This systematic review represents a significant step in unpacking the complex ecosystem of AI and misinformation. It urges a shift away from reductive binaries toward a sophisticated understanding that appreciates AI’s multifarious impacts. In doing so, it opens pathways for designing responsible AI integration strategies that harness technological innovation while safeguarding societal resilience against misinformation’s pervasive threats.
The nuanced exploration of generative AI’s capacities offered by this study is poised to influence the discourse surrounding AI governance and educational policy. As digital misinformation continues to infiltrate societies worldwide, the roles defined here provide a vital blueprint for aligning AI’s deployment with democratic principles and human rights, ultimately shaping a future where AI serves as a robust ally rather than an insidious adversary in the quest for truth.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: The seven roles of generative AI: Potential & pitfalls in combatting misinformation
News Publication Date: 13-Feb-2026
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23794607261417815
Keywords: generative AI, misinformation, AI roles, AI governance, fact-checking, AI literacy, AI ethics, digital information environment, AI transparency, AI hallucinations, educational technology, AI collaboration
