The concept of the ‘ideas-informed society’ represents an ideal, in which people actively seek-out beneficial ideas and reject harmful ones. Positive ideas, like those promoting healthier lifestyles or improved education, can significantly enhance lives and communities. However, research shows that certain demographic groups, especially those with lower education levels and suffering economic deprivation, often do not engage with ideas like these, missing out on the benefits they offer. Dark ideas, on the other hand, are harmful and come in two types: factually incorrect beliefs (type one) and those leading to negative outcomes (type two). Type one dark ideas include fake news, science denial, and conspiracy theories, which are increasingly widespread. Type two dark ideas are linked to populism, which uses emotional manipulation and misinformation to create division and gain power. The spread of both has been exacerbated by social media and underscores the need for citizens’ critical engagement with ideas from across various channels. In turn, such engagement empowers citizens to challenge and reject harmful beliefs. Thus, while engaging with ideas can theoretically make citizens better informed and improve decision-making, these benefits are not universally realized. Further, in the broader ideas ecosystem, the lack of critical consumption can also lead to the dominance of dark ideas, resulting in suboptimal outcomes for individuals and society.

In response, we have previously developed - and tested amongst 7,000 respondents across seven European countries - a theoretical frame to explain the presence, or not, of effective ideas-engagement amongst individuals and communities, as well as explain why individuals and communities may be attracted to dark ideas. Based on a review of research into factors affecting ideas-engagement, our framework comprises three substantive areas: 1) individuals’ levels of education and the extent to which the education people receive enables them engage with ideas critically; 2) the characteristics of individuals’ social networks, in terms of how these impact on access to ideas and the nature of ideas engagement; and 3) whether individuals possess a prospective mindset (i.e. a mindset which enables individuals to focus on long term goals), which can foster value in ideas-engagement (as well encourages positive ideas-related behaviours). As a result, our proposed solution is an ‘effective living’ app, which: 1) promotes beneficial, evidence-informed and reliable ideas to users); 2) Provides a virtual network with which individuals can discuss and exchange ideas; 3) A fact checker which provides the reasoning, science and evidence to debunk dark ideas; and 4) The use of uses tools/techniques to promote future mindedness and positive ideas engagement amongst users. As a result of the app, citizens will engage more positively with ideas, improving their lives and that of their community.

Engaging in market research (UK market only) has been instructive in identifying where to target our proposed ‘effective living’ app, potential market size and possible competitors. As part of this market research, some 40 ideas-related behavioural change apps/platforms were identified, with SWOT analyses undertaken for each. Key findings from our market research suggest that: • Approximately 30 percent of the UK adult population (especially those from a low education background) do not value engaging with positive ideas, despite the life changing potential these can offer • There are no interventions with directly analogous aims or that are serving the target market targetted by this app • The communication of ideas via our app should be short, pithy and understandable. • Sites and platforms that attempt to deliver behavioural change (such as Weight Watchers) promote habit building by encouraging high intensity, long duration engagement so that certain activities become ‘a way of life’. • To prevent user fatigue, platforms, such as Pelaton, often utilise the principle of exploration and exploitation. The main issue with taking the app to development and implementation is that of initial start-up finance and access to app building expertise. Support would also be required to monetise the app effectively, while keeping it free to access, so ensuring its long-term sustainability.