Foreign information manipulation and interference as a trust-impairment mechanism in the age of artificial intelligence
-
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.21511/gg.07(1).2026.06
-
Article InfoVolume 7 2026, Issue #1, pp. 70-87
- 12 Views
-
1 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
Type of the article: Research Article
Foreign information manipulation and interference (FIMI) increasingly operates in an information environment shaped by artificial intelligence, cross-platform circulation, and long-term narrative exposure. This paper develops an audience-centered relational framework for conceptualizing how AI-enabled FIMI may impair institutional trust in democratic societies. Rather than treating FIMI primarily as a problem of false content or message diffusion, the study examines how manipulative narratives may work through five interconnected dimensions: audience segmentation and targeting, narrative positioning, involvement and persuasion pathways, touchpoint configuration and information journey, and relationship degradation and trust impairment. Methodologically, this is a conceptual and theoretical study. It uses publicly available official reports, policy documents, public analyses, media reports, and think-tank publications concerning defense-related information narratives in Taiwan from 2022 to the first half of 2026 as illustrative materials, rather than as a systematically collected empirical dataset. The Taiwan case is therefore used as a theory-guided illustrative application, not as an empirical test of causal effects. The framework illustrates three possible trust-impairment pathways: weakening confidence in government competence, eroding credibility in democratic institutions, and reducing public identification with collective resilience. The study contributes to FIMI research by shifting attention from isolated messages to cumulative relational processes through which AI-enabled narrative environments may contribute to the gradual weakening of democratic trust.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)D83, F52, O33, M31
-
References42
-
Tables0
-
Figures1
-
- Figure 1. An audience-centered relational framework of AI-Enabled FIMI and institutional trust impairment
-
- Aagaard, P., & Marthedal, S. (2023). Political microtargeting: Towards a pragmatic approach. Internet Policy Review, 12(1).
- Bakir, V. (2020). Psychological operations in digital political campaigns: Assessing Cambridge Analytica’s psychographic profiling and targeting. Frontiers in Communication, 5, Article 67.
- Ben-Ari, E. (2021). Taiwan’s changing military covenant and the armed forces’ institutional autonomy. Journal of Political & Military Sociology, 48(2), 174-197.
- Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122-139.
- Bradshaw, S., & Howard, P. N. (2019). The global disinformation order: 2019 global inventory of organised social media manipulation (Working Paper 2019.2). Oxford Internet Institute.
- Brady, W. J., Wills, J. A., Jost, J. T., Tucker, J. A., & Van Bavel, J. J. (2017). Emotion shapes the diffusion of moralized content in social networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(28), 7313-7318.
- Central News Agency. (2026, May 4). Ministry of National Defense: CCP cognitive warfare has shifted from isolated infiltration to systematic deployment. (In Chinese).
- Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). Guilford Press.
- Chang, W.-H., & Chen, C.-S. (2026). EU strategies against foreign information manipulation and interference: An overview. Defense Security Biweekly, 106, 9-14. (In Chinese).
- Deppe, C., & Schaal, G. S. (2024). Cognitive warfare: A conceptual analysis of the NATO ACT cognitive warfare exploratory concept. Frontiers in Big Data, 7, Article 1452129.
- 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, 13-29.
- European External Action Service (EEAS). (2025). 3rd EEAS report on foreign information manipulation and interference threats: Exposing the architecture of FIMI operations.
- Feuerriegel, S., DiResta, R., Goldstein, J. A., Kumar, S., Lorenz-Spreen, P., Tomz, M., & Pröllochs, N. (2023). Research can help to tackle AI-generated disinformation. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(11), 1818-1821.
- Fletcher, R., & Nielsen, R. K. (2018). Are people incidentally exposed to news on social media? A comparative analysis. New Media & Society, 20(7), 2450-2468.
- Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and their brands: Developing relationship theory in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(4), 343-373.
- Goldstein, J. A., Sastry, G., Musser, M., DiResta, R., Gentzel, M., & Sedova, K. (2023). Generative language models and automated influence operations: Emerging threats and potential mitigations. arXiv.
- Helmus, T. C., & Chandra, B. (2024, April 16). Generative artificial intelligence threats to information integrity and potential policy responses. RAND Corporation.
- Heward, C., Li, W., Chun Tie, Y., & Waterworth, P. (2024). A scoping review of military culture, military identity, and mental health outcomes in military personnel. Military Medicine, 189(11-12), e2382-e2393.
- Homburg, C., Jozić, D., & Kuehnl, C. (2017). Customer experience management: Toward implementing an evolving marketing concept. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 45, 377-401.
- Hung, T.-C., & Hung, T.-W. (2022). How China’s cognitive warfare works: A frontline perspective of Taiwan’s anti-disinformation wars. Journal of Global Security Studies, 7(4), Article ogac016.
- Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10, 18-26.
- Kalpokas, I. (2017). Information warfare on social media: A brand management perspective. Baltic Journal of Law & Politics, 10(1), 35-62.
- Kohavi, R., Tang, D., & Xu, Y. (2020). Trustworthy online controlled experiments: A practical guide to A/B testing. Cambridge University Press.
- Kotler, P., & Keller, K. L. (2012). Marketing management (14th ed.). Prentice Hall.
- Lazer, D. M. J., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A. J., Greenhill, K. M., Menczer, F., Metzger, M. J., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S. A., Sunstein, C. R., Thorson, E. A., Watts, D. J., & Zittrain, J. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094-1096.
- Lemon, K. N., & Verhoef, P. C. (2016). Understanding customer experience throughout the customer journey. Journal of Marketing, 80(6), 69-96.
- Levi, M., & Stoker, L. (2000). Political trust and trustworthiness. Annual Review of Political Science, 3, 475-507.
- MacInnis, D. J. (2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of Marketing, 75(4), 136-154.
- Matz, S. C., Kosinski, M., Nave, G., & Stillwell, D. J. (2017). Psychological targeting as an effective approach to digital mass persuasion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 114(48), 12714-12719.
- Morgan, R. M., & Hunt, S. D. (1994). The commitment-trust theory of relationship marketing. Journal of Marketing, 58(3), 20-38.
- National Security Bureau (NSB). (2024). China’s disinformation dissemination patterns in 2024.
- National Security Bureau. (2026). Analysis of the Chinese Communist Party’s cognitive warfare tactics against Taiwan in 2025. (In Chinese).
- North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). (2025, February 3). NATO’s approach to counter information threats.
- Office of the President, Republic of China (Taiwan). (2022, December 27). President Tsai announces military force realignment plan.
- Pathak, R., Spezzano, F., & Pera, M. S. (2023). Understanding the contribution of recommendation algorithms on misinformation recommendation and misinformation dissemination on social networks. ACM Transactions on the Web, 17(4), 1-26.
- Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 19, 123-205.
- Sedova, K., McNeill, C., Johnson, A., Joshi, A., & Wulkan, I. (2021). AI and the future of disinformation campaigns: Part 2: A threat model. Center for Security and Emerging Technology.
- Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. Science, 236(4799), 280-285.
- Tzeng, Y.-S. (2026). The rise of AI scams and their challenges to countering cognitive operations. Defense Security Biweekly, 111, 25-32.
- Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151.
- Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking. Council of Europe.
- Wu, C.-C., & Fan, S.-C. (2026). Exploring the predictive effects of family socioeconomic status, parental support, and career adaptability among military cadets: How does socioeconomic status moderate career adaptability? Journal of General Education: Concept and Practice, 14(1), 1-52.


