Role Play Scenarios: Critical Thinking 2

Critical Thinking Roleplay Cases

How to use this tool (for facilitators)

This set of short roleplay cases is designed to support discussions with young people around critical thinking, media literacy, and online safety.

Each case reflects situations that are realistic for young people in today’s European digital context.

How to work with the cases:

  • Choose one case and read it aloud, or assign roles to participants.
  • Ask the group to pause at key moments and discuss: What is happening? What choices are available? What information is missing?
  • Encourage multiple perspectives; there is rarely only one “right” answer.
  • Use the facilitator notes at the end of each case to guide reflection and highlight key learning points.

The cases are intentionally brief and open-ended so they can be adapted to different group sizes, ages, and local contexts.

 

Case 1: “Is this source trustworthy?”

Scenario: Emma (16) is working on a school project about climate change. She finds a video on TikTok that clearly explains why climate change is “exaggerated by the media.” The video has thousands of likes and confident-looking graphs. Emma considers using it as a source for her presentation.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

  • Popularity (likes, shares) does not equal credibility.
  • Who created the content, and why?
  • Are sources named or verifiable?
  • Encourage young people to cross-check information with reliable sources.

Case 2: “Too good to be true?”

Scenario: Lukas (17) receives an Instagram ad offering a paid online job: “Earn 300€ a week by liking videos.” The page looks professional, and some comments say it works. To apply, Lukas needs to register with his email and upload a photo of his ID.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • Warning signs of scams (easy money, urgency, requests for personal data).
  • Why would a company need an ID for this task?
  • How ads are targeted to young people.
  • Safer ways to check legitimacy before engaging.

Case 3: “Group chat pressure”

Scenario: In a class WhatsApp group, someone shares a link to a leaked exam paper. A few classmates say, “Everyone is using it, it’s fine.” Others stay silent. Sofia (15) feels uncomfortable but doesn’t want to be excluded.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • Peer pressure in digital spaces.
  • Legal and ethical consequences of sharing leaked content.
  • The difference between private chats and real privacy.
  • Strategies for saying no or seeking support.

Case 4: “The viral challenge”

Scenario: A new challenge is trending on social media. It involves filming a prank in public and posting reactions online. Some videos are funny, others clearly embarrass people who didn’t agree to be filmed. Alex (14) is encouraged by friends to join to gain followers.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • Consent and respect for others’ privacy.
  • Long-term consequences of viral content.
  • Platform rules vs. ethical responsibility.
  • Thinking beyond likes and visibility.

Case 5: “AI did it for me”

Scenario: Noor (18) uses an AI tool to help write a school essay. The text sounds convincing, but Noor doesn’t fully understand all the arguments. The teacher asks follow-up questions in class.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • AI as a support tool vs. replacing thinking.
  • Responsibility for submitted work.
  • How to critically evaluate AI-generated content.
  • Transparency and school rules around AI use.

Case 6: “Who is behind the profile?”

Scenario: Mika (15) starts chatting in a gaming platform with someone who says they are the same age and live nearby. After a few weeks, the person asks to move the conversation to a private app and wants to share personal photos.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • Online identity and anonymity.
  • Grooming risks and manipulation tactics.
  • Importance of boundaries and trusted adults.
  • When and how to report concerns.

Case 7: “Edited reality”

Scenario: On social media, nearly everyone in Julia’s (16) feed looks happy, successful, and confident. Influencers promote “perfect” lifestyles and products. Julia starts feeling that her own life is boring and inadequate.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • How algorithms shape what we see.
  • The difference between curated content and real life.
  • Emotional impact of comparison.
  • Critical awareness of influencer marketing.

Case 8: “Sharing for a cause”

Scenario: After seeing emotional videos about a humanitarian crisis, Tom (19) shares a fundraising link without checking it. Later, a friend questions whether the organisation is real.

 

Facilitator notes – What to consider:

 

  • Emotional content and manipulation.
  • Verifying organisations and donation links.
  • The balance between acting fast and acting responsibly.
  • Digital responsibility when sharing information.

Closing reflection for facilitators

Encourage young people to see critical thinking as a skill they can practice, not a test they can fail. The goal is not to avoid digital spaces, but to navigate them with curiosity, caution, and confidence.

“Funded by the European Union. Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or European Education and Culture Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.”