全球范围的“新闻回避”已达到统计新高：2025 年路透数字新闻报告覆盖六大洲 48 个市场，约 40% 受访者主动避开新闻，相比 2017 年的 29% 明显上升，构成八年间约 11 个百分点的增幅。研究将原因归为信息超载与负面议程长期占比过高。同时，大规模数据表明回避行为跨领域呈现一致性：一项涵盖 25 国、逾 50 万人的荟萃分析发现，近三分之一的人避免关键医学检测（癌症、HIV、阿尔茨海默症等），并非冷漠而是因认知过载、污名化压力与制度不信任。金融行为亦呈同样模式：市场下行期投资者减少查账户频率，形成“无知溢价”。行为科学界将其统称为“鸵鸟效应”，并在 33 篇专题论文中系统化研究。
该效应具年龄梯度：儿童在约 7 岁开始回避会造成情绪痛感的信息；行为实验显示越大的儿童越常选择“不查看”会造成公平冲突的决策后果，以保留心理回旋空间。成人回避倾向随年龄增强：80 多岁人群比 20 多岁人群在伴侣不忠问题上少 20 个百分点想知道真相；对无法治疗疾病的知情意愿差距扩大到超过 30 个百分点。长期纵向研究表明年长者主观幸福感更高，理论解释之一是其情绪调节能力增强，而“选择性无知”即为关键机制。认知科学家提出“批判性忽视”应与媒介素养并列，作为数字时代的核心技能，用于过滤耗损注意力与行动能力的内容。
但广义的集体回避可能造成宏观风险：医疗忽视可致命，金融逃避可破产，管理层与公民的有意不知会纵容伤害扩散。大规模新闻回避与“多重危机时代”并行，降低社会处理气候、威权主义与民主衰退风险的能力。研究共识强调，问题不在知道更少，而在明确“何时知道更多已无效用”。信息平台在盈利模式上扩大危机化与警报密度，使公众难以区分何为真正重要。合理的选择性回避可节约心理资源、维持参与能力，但需保持比例感与目的性。
Global “news avoidance” has reached record levels: the 2025 Reuters Digital News Report, spanning 48 markets across six continents, finds that roughly 40% of respondents now avoid news, up from 29% in 2017 — an increase of about 11 percentage points over eight years. Research attributes this to information overload and persistently negative news agendas. Parallel large-scale evidence shows avoidance across domains: a meta-analysis of more than 500,000 people in 25 countries finds that nearly one-third avoid major medical tests (cancer, HIV, Alzheimer’s) due to cognitive strain, stigma and mistrust. Financial data show similar behavior: during downturns investors check portfolios less, effectively paying an “ignorance premium.” Behavioral science labels this constellation the “ostrich effect,” now the subject of 33 dedicated academic papers.
The effect shows a strong age gradient: around age 7, children begin avoiding information that could hurt emotionally; experiments show older children increasingly choose not to view consequences that might create moral conflict. Among adults, avoidance strengthens with age: people in their 80s are about 20 percentage points less likely than those in their 20s to want to know about partner infidelity, and over 30 points less likely to want results about incurable diseases. Longitudinal research links higher well-being in older adults to improved emotional regulation, with selective ignorance functioning as a key mechanism. Cognitive scientists propose “critical ignoring” as a core digital-age skill alongside media literacy, enabling people to filter attention-draining or agency-eroding content.
Yet large-scale avoidance carries systemic risks: ignoring medical data can be fatal, financial avoidance can lead to ruin, and strategic ignorance in institutions enables harm. Mass retreat from news during a “polycrisis era” undermines societal capacity to confront climate risk, authoritarian drift and democratic erosion. The consensus is that the issue is not knowing less but knowing when additional information has no marginal value. Platforms muddy this boundary by maximizing crisis cues and alerts. Intentional selective avoidance can preserve cognitive resources and support meaningful engagement, but only when governed by proportion and purpose.