Social Cognition
Social Feed Task
Also called: simulated social media feed task, social media engagement task
Measure likes, shares and visible dwell time while people browse a simulated feed of original posts.
2-4 minUntimed
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 114
- Evidence grade
- D
- Registered clinical studies
- 1
Account 3 · 24 likes
I brought a book to the park and ended up watching the leaves move.
What it measures
Measure engagement with a simulated feed through likes, shares, skips and visible dwell time. Studies choose a set of original posts and a post label.
Constructs
- Social attention
- Content engagement
- Sharing choices
Research uses
- Social media research
- Studies of labels and engagement
How the paradigm works
The Social Feed Task measures engagement with original posts in a simulated feed. Participants scroll through posts, choose Like or Share independently, or skip, then move on. Earlier posts remain available to read. Each post records both choices and visible dwell time. No free text is collected.
More about the paradigm
The standard session uses 8 posts from everyday moments; studies can choose 4 posts or a creative activities set. A seeded draw selects and orders posts without replacement and assigns simulated like counts. Studies choose no label, Suggested or Sponsored on every post. One separate practice post explains the controls. The end screen discloses the simulated accounts and counts and says shares stayed in the session.
Engagement rate is the share of completed posts liked, shared or both. Like and share rates and counts are also reported. Dwell time counts only while at least half the current post is visible and the tab is visible. It is exposure time, not a measure of gaze or comprehension. Reading earlier posts does not add dwell time to them. Counts, labels, post texts and order are exported with each response.
Scores
- Engagement rate%
- Share of completed posts liked, shared or both.
- Descriptive; no better direction
- Like rate%
- Share of completed posts liked.
- Compare within the same post set and label
- Share rate%
- Share of completed posts shared.
- Compare within the same post set and label
- Posts likedcount
- Number of completed posts liked.
- Descriptive
- Posts sharedcount
- Number of completed posts shared.
- Descriptive
- Median visible dwell timems
- Median time with the current post at least half visible and the tab visible.
- Exposure time, not gaze or reading comprehension
- Total visible dwell timems
- Sum of valid visible dwell times.
- Compare the same number of posts
- Posts completedcount
- Posts with a recorded like and share state, including skips.
- Fewer than 90% completed is flagged
- Posts plannedcount
- Number of posts selected for this run.
- 4 or 8
- Median response timems
- Median time to advance, excluding responses under 100 ms.
- Descriptive; includes time browsing earlier posts
- Responses under 100 mscount
- Very fast advances, retained in the scores.
- Descriptive; quick skips are allowed
Use and evidence
114 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, up 470% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 230 of 582 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 46 |
| 2024 | 31 |
| 2023 | 23 |
| 2022 | 3 |
| 2021 | 11 |
| 2020 | 10 |
| 2019 | 4 |
| 2018 | 4 |
| 2017 | 1 |
| 2016 | 1 |
| 2015 | 1 |
| 2014 | 3 |
| 2013 | 3 |
| 2012 | 1 |
| 2011 | 0 |
| 2010 | 0 |
| 2009 | 1 |
| 2008 | 0 |
| 2007 | 0 |
| 2006 | 0 |
| 2005 | 0 |
| 2004 | 0 |
| 2003 | 0 |
| 2002 | 0 |
| 2001 | 0 |
| 2000 | 0 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade D
Little published measurement evidence found.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 20
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 1
Measured on ConductCognition
Pooled across the studies that feed our platform norms, by device group. A figure needs 50 or more people.
No pooled figure yet.
Note on the counts: includes simulations of social media run with software agents.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Posts
- 8 original posts, or 4 in the shorter setting. Choose everyday moments or creative activities, with 8 posts in each bank. All items follow the session language.
- Labels
- No label by default. Suggested or Sponsored can appear on every post. Account numbers and like counts are simulated.
- Practice
- 1 separate post with feedback about the controls.
- Trial
- Scroll the feed, toggle Like and Share independently, then choose Next post, or Skip with neither selected. No time limit; a 300 ms gap follows each post.
- Order
- Seeded selection without replacement and balanced simulated like counts of 3, 8, 24 and 56.
- Dwell time
- Time when the current post is at least half visible in the feed and the document is visible. Previous posts can be reread but their dwell times are not revised.
- Score
- Engagement rate, like and share rates and counts, visible dwell times and completion.
- Debrief
- The final screen says accounts and counts were simulated and all likes and shares stayed in the session.
Posts and translations were written for this task. Choices describe engagement with these posts. Norms and percentiles are off.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Uses the run with most post responses, ties going to the last. Fewer than 90% of planned posts completed is flagged. Choices and dwell time are descriptive; a hidden tab flags the run.
Why these rules
Skipping every post or liking every post is a possible preference. Brief exposure is part of scrolling behavior, so neither uniform nor fast responses invalidate this task.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Posts | 8 posts (standard) | 4 posts, 8 posts (standard) |
| Post set | Everyday moments | Everyday moments, Creative activities |
| Label on every post | No label | No label, Suggested, Sponsored |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Social Feed Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Butler, Prike & Ecker, 2024), with the standard settings (posts: 8 posts; post set: Everyday moments; label on every post: No label). The main score was engagement rate (share of completed posts liked, shared or both).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Butler, L. H., Prike, T., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2024). Nudge-based misinformation interventions are effective in information environments with low misinformation prevalence. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 11495. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-62286-7Simulated feed with post-level sharing choices. Our original social posts measure engagement, with no truth judgment or misinformation intervention.
Source papers
- Butler, L. H., Prike, T., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2024). Nudge-based misinformation interventions are effective in information environments with low misinformation prevalence. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 11495.Paradigm source, Adults
Questions
How long does the Social Feed Task take?
About 2 to 4 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Untimed test: runs on desktops, laptops, tablets and phones. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Engagement rate, Like rate, Share rate, Posts liked, Posts shared, Median visible dwell time, Total visible dwell time, Posts completed, Posts planned, Median response time and Responses under 100 ms. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Social Feed Task used in research?
114 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, up 470% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 230 of 582 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Social Feed Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 1 registered clinical study uses it as an outcome (evidence grade D in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Posts (4 posts, 8 posts (standard)), post set (Everyday moments, Creative activities) and label on every post (No label, Suggested, Sponsored). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese, with its words in the same language. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.