This study investigated whether accessing conflicting claims in other documents by means of hyperlinks embedded within currently read documents may facilitate conflict detection and source-content integration. Norwegian undergraduates (n = 85) read multiple conflicting documents on a controversial health-related issue, with half of the conflicting claims across documents hyperlinked and the other half not. Moreover, half of the participants were told that they would get more information by clicking on the links (weak prompting condition) while the other half were additionally told that clicking on the links was necessary to get a more complete understanding of the issue (strong prompting condition). Results indicated that the extent to which participants accessed conflicting claims in other documents via the hyperlinks was positively related to their detection of cross-document conflicts as well as their integration of source-content information. A mediational analysis indicated that conflict detection mediated the effect of accessing conflicting claims via the hyperlinks on source-content integration. No relationship was found between the prompting condition and participants' selection of the hyperlinks. The theoretical significance as well as the practical value of our findings are discussed.