The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction

Nature Reviews Psychology, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 1(1), P. 13 - 29

Published: Jan. 12, 2022

Language: Английский

---

The Psychology of Fake News

Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 25(5), P. 388 - 402

Published: March 18, 2021

Recent evidence contradicts the common narrative that partisanship and politically motivated reasoning explain why people fall for 'fake news'.Poor truth discernment is linked to a lack of careful relevant knowledge, as well use familiarity source heuristics.There also large disconnect between what believe they will share on social media, this largely driven by inattention rather than purposeful sharing misinformation.Effective interventions can nudge media users think about accuracy, leverage crowdsourced veracity ratings improve ranking algorithms. We synthesize burgeoning literature investigating false or highly misleading news online. Contrary whereby politics drives susceptibility fake news, are 'better' at discerning from falsehood (despite greater overall belief) when evaluating concordant news. Instead, poor associated with heuristics such familiarity. Furthermore, there substantial media. This dissociation inattention, more so misinformation. Thus, successfully focus accuracy. Crowdsourced be leveraged Fabricated nothing new. For example, in 1835 The Sun newspaper New York published six articles purported life moon which came known 'Great Moon Hoax'. During 2016 US Presidential Election UK Brexit Referendum, however, different form (see Glossary) rose prominence (Box 1): political 'news' stories, primarily originating [1.Lazer D. et al.The science news.Science. 2018; 359: 1094-1096Crossref PubMed Scopus (727) Google Scholar]. Concern was redoubled 2020 face widespread misinformation disinformation [2.Wardle C. Information Disorder: Essential Glossary, Shorenstein Center Media, Politics, Public Policy. Harvard Kennedy School, 2018Google Scholar] coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic [3.Loomba S. al.Measuring impact COVID-19 vaccine vaccination intent USA.Nat. Hum. Behav. 2021; (Published online February 5, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1)Crossref (0) [4.Pennycook G. Rand D.G. Examining beliefs voter fraud wake Election.Harvard Sch. Misinformation Rev. 2: 1-19Google Misleading hyperpartisan yellow journalism [5.Kaplan R.L. Yellow journalism.in: Donsbach W. International Encyclopedia Communication. John Wiley & Sons, 2008Crossref Scholar], related forms problematic content likely sources polarization [6.Faris R.M. al.Partisanship, Propaganda, Disinformation: Online Media U.S. Election. Berkman Klein Internet Society, 2017Google What it human psychology – its interaction [7.Lewandowsky al.Technology Democracy. Understanding Influence Technologies Political Behaviour Decision-Making, EU Science Hub2020Google Scholar,8.Kozyreva A. al.Citizens versus internet: confronting digital challenges cognitive tools.Psychol. Sci. Interest. 2020; 21: 103-156Crossref (2) explains failure distinguish accurate inaccurate online? Apart being theoretical interest, question has practical consequences: developing effective against depends understanding underlying psychology.Box 1Prevalence Fake NewsVarious analyses web browsing data have been used an attempt determine prevalence often using data, archives fact-checking websites, survey, Allcott Gentzkow [19.Allcott H. M. Social election.J. Econ. Perspect. 2017; 31: 211-236Crossref (1218) estimated particular set stories were shared Facebook least 38 million times 3 months leading up election (30 favoring Donald Trump). estimate represents lower bound since only reflects specific news.Other focused publishers (i.e., websites) individual articles. Based Twitter [117.Grinberg N. al.Fake twitter during election.Science. 2019; 363: 374-378Crossref (206) [77.Allen J. al.Scaling wisdom crowds.PsyArXiv. October 2, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/9qdza)Google Scholar,118.Guess A.M. al.Less you think: predictors dissemination Facebook.Sci. Adv. 5eaau4586Crossref (4) [89.Guess al.Exposure untrustworthy websites election.Nat. 4: 472-480Crossref (21) these studies concluded sites small proportion most people's diets, average user exposed little election.These important limitations, because available concern visit click through off-platform. But, course, vast majority time simply read post without clicking link actual website. so-called news' one category misinformation, much larger diets Scholar,119.Bradshaw al.Sourcing automation information over United States, 2016–2018.Polit. Commun. 37: 173-193Crossref (6) on-platform exposure remains open [120.Rogers R. scale Facebook's problem upon how classified.Harvard 1: 1-15Google feel premature conclude rates minimal, thus not (also Scholar]). especially true looking beyond new threats claims Scholar,44.Pennycook al.Fighting media: experimental scalable accuracy intervention.Psychol. 770-780Crossref (73) gained traction amplification (mostly Republican) elites.Accordingly, (and broadly) equally distributed across all users. In particular, conservatives older adults far Scholar,89.Guess Scholar,117.Grinberg Studies found associations conservatism belief USA [20.Pennycook Lazy, biased: partisan better explained reasoning.Cognition. 188: 39-50Crossref (177) Chile [121.Halpern al.From conspiracy theories trust others: factors influence exposure, believing news.in: Meiselwitz Computing Media. Design, Human Behavior Analytics. HCII 2019. Lecture Notes Computer Science. vol 11578. Springer, Cham2019: 217-232Crossref (5) Germany [122.Zimmermann F. Kohring Mistrust, disinforming vote choice: panel survey origins consequences 2017 German Parliamentary Election.Polit. 215-237Crossref (8) but Hungary [24.Faragó L. al.We we doctored ourselves: connection news.Soc. Psychol. (Gott). 51: 77-90Crossref who engage less lower-quality [71.Mosleh al.Cognitive reflection correlates behavior Twitter.Nat. 12: 1-10Crossref even if exposures substantially higher subpopulations may particularly vulnerable content. Finally, originates sometimes transitions audiences picked traditional outlets either via direct repetition debunking (which result inadvertent amplification). Various Other election. These elites. Accordingly, here presented However, come many forms, several literatures clearly related, outside scope our review (although draw some connections throughout). include work [9.Sunstein C.R. Vermeule Conspiracy theories: causes cures.J. Polit. Philos. 2009; 17: 202-227Crossref (126) superstition [10.Lindeman Aarnio K. Superstitious, magical, paranormal beliefs: An integrative model.J. Res. Pers. 2007; 41: 731-744Crossref (118) rumors [11.Berinsky A.J. Rumors health care reform: experiments misinformation.Br. 47: 241-262Crossref (171) bullshit receptivity [12.Pennycook al.On reception detection pseudo-profound bullshit.Judgm. Decis. Mak. 2015; 10: 549-563Google misperceptions [13.Amazeen M.A. al.Correcting consumer misperceptions: effectiveness effects rating contextual correction formats.J. Mass Q. 95: 28-48Google among others. examples organized campaigns (e.g., Russian Research Agency, relating global warming Election). When considering believe, essential two fundamentally ways conceptualize One approach 'discernment', extent believed 'relative' Discernment, typically calculated minus (akin 'sensitivity' d' signal theory [14.Wickens T. Elementary Signal Detection Theory. Oxford University Press, 2002Google Scholar]) captures 'overall' one's gives insight into failures ('falling news'). Another belief, regardless (calculated sum akin calculating 'bias' Critically, alter need ability tell [15.Batailler, al. A identification (in press)Google Scholar]: increasing decreasing headlines equivalent no effect does affect discernment). popular discern rooted motivations. argued consumers (mis)information [16.Kahan D.M. Misconceptions, logic identity-protective cognition.in: SSRN Electron. Cultural Cognition Project Working Paper Series No. 164, Yale Law 605, Economics 575. 2017Crossref 'identity-protective cognition' faced valenced content, leads them overly consistent their identity skeptical inconsistent [17.Kahan Ideology, reasoning, reflection.Judgm. 2013; 8: 407-424Google argues place loyalty identities above fail favor ideologically [18.Van Bavel J.J. Pereira brain: Identity-based model belief.Trends Cogn. 22: 213-224Abstract Full Text PDF (68) accounts contend strong causal motivation dominant factor explaining It belief: People (versus discordant) Scholar, 20.Pennycook 21.Pennycook al.Shifting attention reduce online.Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03344-2Crossref 22.Pereira al.Identity concerns drive news.PsyArXiv. September 18, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.31234/OSF.IO/7VC5D)Google 23.Vegetti Mancosu sophistication misinformation.Polit. 678-695Crossref (1) 24.Faragó 25.Drummond al.Limited climate change.Environ. 081003Crossref (Figure 1B ). note, concordance smaller Scholar,21.Pennycook Scholar,26.Bago B. fast slow: deliberation reduces (but true) headlines.J. Exp. Gen. 149: 1608-1613Crossref (22) other words, discordant trump truth. necessarily indicate reasoning. Such differences could arise unbiased rational Bayesian) inference built prior factual differ party lines owing environments) [27.Tappin B.M. al.Thinking inferences reasoning: paradigmatic study designs undermine inference.Curr. Opin. 34: 81-87Crossref (7) 28.Tappin al.Rethinking reasoning.J. 29, http://dx.doi.org/10.31234/OSF.IO/YUZFJ)Crossref 29.Tappin al.Bayesian biased? Analytic thinking updating.Cognition. 204: 1-12Crossref 30.Baron Jost J.T. False equivalence: liberals States biased?.Perspect. 14: 292-303Crossref (34) 31.Gerber Green Misperceptions perceptual bias.Annu. 1999; 189-210Crossref (185) 32.Leeper T.J. Slothuus parties, public opinion formation.Polit. 2014; 35: 129-156Crossref 33.Friedman Motivated skepticism inevitable conviction? Dogmatism politics.Crit. 2012; 24: 131-155Crossref (10) 2 details).Box 2Challenges Identifying Politically ReasoningThe observation ideology/partisanship ideology/partisanship) taken [22.Pereira Scholar,123.Ditto P.H. al.At bias bipartisan: meta-analytic comparison conservatives.Perspect. 273-291Crossref (78) Scholar,124.Clark C.J. Winegard Tribalism war peace: nature evolution ideological epistemology significance modern science.Psychol. Inq. 1-22Crossref pattern actually provide clear politicall

Language: Английский

---

Misinformation: susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public

Nature Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 28(3), P. 460 - 467

Published: March 1, 2022

Language: Английский

---

Partisan Polarization Is the Primary Psychological Motivation behind Political Fake News Sharing on Twitter

American Political Science Review, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 115(3), P. 999 - 1015

Published: May 6, 2021

Abstract The rise of “fake news” is a major concern in contemporary Western democracies. Yet, research on the psychological motivations behind spread political fake news social media surprisingly limited. Are citizens who share ignorant and lazy? they fueled by sinister motives, seeking to disrupt status quo? Or do seek attack partisan opponents an increasingly polarized environment? This article first test these competing hypotheses based careful mapping profiles over 2,300 American Twitter users linked behavioral sharing data sentiment analyses more than 500,000 story headlines. findings contradict ignorance perspective but provide some support for disruption strong polarization perspective. Thus, individuals report hating their are most likely selectively content that useful derogating opponents. Overall, our show same drive other forms behavior, including from traditional credible sources.

Language: Английский

---

Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review

Social Science & Medicine, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 301, P. 114912 - 114912

Published: March 14, 2022

Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories can have severe consequences; it is therefore crucial to understand this phenomenon, its similarities with general belief, but also how context-dependent. The aim of systematic review provide a comprehensive overview the available research on beliefs and synthesise make widely accessible. We present synthesis belief from 85 international articles, identified appraised through review, line contemporary protocols guidelines for reviews. identify number potential antecedents (individual differences, personality traits, demographic variables, attitudes, thinking styles biases, group identity, trust authorities, social media use), their consequences (protective behaviours, self-centred misguided behaviours such as hoarding pseudoscientific health practices, vaccination intentions, psychological wellbeing, other negative discrimination violence), effect sizes relations beliefs. conclude that understanding both they are context-dependent highly important tackle them, whether pandemic or future threats, climate change.

Language: Английский

---

Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media

Science Advances, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 8(34)

Published: Aug. 24, 2022

Online misinformation continues to have adverse consequences for society. Inoculation theory has been put forward as a way reduce susceptibility by informing people about how they might be misinformed, but its scalability elusive both at theoretical level and practical level. We developed five short videos that inoculate against manipulation techniques commonly used in misinformation: emotionally manipulative language, incoherence, false dichotomies, scapegoating, ad hominem attacks. In seven preregistered studies, i.e., six randomized controlled studies (

Language: Английский

---

Stewardship of global collective behavior

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Journal Year: 2021, Volume and Issue: 118(27)

Published: June 21, 2021

Collective behavior provides a framework for understanding how the actions and properties of groups emerge from way individuals generate share information. In humans, information flows were initially shaped by natural selection yet are increasingly structured emerging communication technologies. Our larger, more complex social networks now transfer high-fidelity over vast distances at low cost. The digital age rise media have accelerated changes to our systems, with poorly understood functional consequences. This gap in knowledge represents principal challenge scientific progress, democracy, address global crises. We argue that study collective must “crisis discipline” just as medicine, conservation, climate science have, focus on providing actionable insight policymakers regulators stewardship systems.

Language: Английский

---

Growing polarization around climate change on social media

Nature Climate Change, Journal Year: 2022, Volume and Issue: 12(12), P. 1114 - 1121

Published: Nov. 24, 2022

Abstract Climate change and political polarization are two of the twenty-first century’s critical socio-political issues. Here we investigate their intersection by studying discussion around United Nations Conference Parties on Change (COP) using Twitter data from 2014 to 2021. First, reveal a large increase in ideological during COP26, following low between COP20 COP25. Second, show that this is driven growing right-wing activity, fourfold since COP21 relative pro-climate groups. Finally, identify broad range ‘climate contrarian’ views emphasizing theme hypocrisy as topic cross-ideological appeal; contrarian accusations have become key themes climate 2019. With future action reliant negotiations at COP27 beyond, our results highlight importance monitoring its impacts public discourse.

Language: Английский

---

Signal propagation in complex networks

Physics Reports, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: 1017, P. 1 - 96

Published: April 5, 2023

Language: Английский

---

Using large language models in psychology

Nature Reviews Psychology, Journal Year: 2023, Volume and Issue: unknown

Published: Oct. 13, 2023

Language: Английский

---