Processing political misinformation: Comprehending the trump phenomenon

Briony Swire, Adam J. Berinsky, Stephan Lewandowsky, Ullrich K. H. Ecker

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This study investigated the cognitive processing of true and false political information. Specifically, it examined the impact of source credibility on the assessment of veracity when information comes from a polarizing source (Experiment 1), and effectiveness of explanations when they come from one’s own political party or an opposition party (Experiment 2). These experiments were conducted prior to the 2016 Presidential election. Participants rated their belief in factual and incorrect statements that President Trump made on the campaign trail; facts were subsequently affirmed and misinformation retracted. Participants then re-rated their belief immediately or after a delay. Experiment 1 found that (i) if information was attributed to Trump, Republican supporters of Trump believed it more than if it was presented without attribution, whereas the opposite was true for Democrats and (ii) although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation items following a correction, they did not change their voting preferences. Experiment 2 revealed that the explanation’s source had relatively little impact, and belief updating was more influenced by perceived credibility of the individual initially purporting the information. These findings suggest that people use political figures as a heuristic to guide evaluation of what is true or false, yet do not necessarily insist on veracity as a prerequisite for supporting political candidates.

Original languageEnglish
Article number160802
JournalRoyal Society Open Science
Volume4
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Mar 2017

Fingerprint

Communication
Politics

Cite this

@article{675deb6300934a1891c43d6e025e546e,
title = "Processing political misinformation: Comprehending the trump phenomenon",
abstract = "This study investigated the cognitive processing of true and false political information. Specifically, it examined the impact of source credibility on the assessment of veracity when information comes from a polarizing source (Experiment 1), and effectiveness of explanations when they come from one’s own political party or an opposition party (Experiment 2). These experiments were conducted prior to the 2016 Presidential election. Participants rated their belief in factual and incorrect statements that President Trump made on the campaign trail; facts were subsequently affirmed and misinformation retracted. Participants then re-rated their belief immediately or after a delay. Experiment 1 found that (i) if information was attributed to Trump, Republican supporters of Trump believed it more than if it was presented without attribution, whereas the opposite was true for Democrats and (ii) although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation items following a correction, they did not change their voting preferences. Experiment 2 revealed that the explanation’s source had relatively little impact, and belief updating was more influenced by perceived credibility of the individual initially purporting the information. These findings suggest that people use political figures as a heuristic to guide evaluation of what is true or false, yet do not necessarily insist on veracity as a prerequisite for supporting political candidates.",
keywords = "Belief updating, Continued influence effect, Misinformation, Motivated cognition, Source credibility",
author = "Briony Swire and Berinsky, {Adam J.} and Stephan Lewandowsky and Ecker, {Ullrich K. H.}",
year = "2017",
month = "3",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1098/rsos.160802",
language = "English",
volume = "4",
journal = "Royal Society Open Science",
issn = "2054-5703",
publisher = "Royal Soc",
number = "3",

}

Processing political misinformation : Comprehending the trump phenomenon. / Swire, Briony; Berinsky, Adam J.; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Ecker, Ullrich K. H.

In: Royal Society Open Science, Vol. 4, No. 3, 160802, 01.03.2017.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Processing political misinformation

T2 - Comprehending the trump phenomenon

AU - Swire, Briony

AU - Berinsky, Adam J.

AU - Lewandowsky, Stephan

AU - Ecker, Ullrich K. H.

PY - 2017/3/1

Y1 - 2017/3/1

N2 - This study investigated the cognitive processing of true and false political information. Specifically, it examined the impact of source credibility on the assessment of veracity when information comes from a polarizing source (Experiment 1), and effectiveness of explanations when they come from one’s own political party or an opposition party (Experiment 2). These experiments were conducted prior to the 2016 Presidential election. Participants rated their belief in factual and incorrect statements that President Trump made on the campaign trail; facts were subsequently affirmed and misinformation retracted. Participants then re-rated their belief immediately or after a delay. Experiment 1 found that (i) if information was attributed to Trump, Republican supporters of Trump believed it more than if it was presented without attribution, whereas the opposite was true for Democrats and (ii) although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation items following a correction, they did not change their voting preferences. Experiment 2 revealed that the explanation’s source had relatively little impact, and belief updating was more influenced by perceived credibility of the individual initially purporting the information. These findings suggest that people use political figures as a heuristic to guide evaluation of what is true or false, yet do not necessarily insist on veracity as a prerequisite for supporting political candidates.

AB - This study investigated the cognitive processing of true and false political information. Specifically, it examined the impact of source credibility on the assessment of veracity when information comes from a polarizing source (Experiment 1), and effectiveness of explanations when they come from one’s own political party or an opposition party (Experiment 2). These experiments were conducted prior to the 2016 Presidential election. Participants rated their belief in factual and incorrect statements that President Trump made on the campaign trail; facts were subsequently affirmed and misinformation retracted. Participants then re-rated their belief immediately or after a delay. Experiment 1 found that (i) if information was attributed to Trump, Republican supporters of Trump believed it more than if it was presented without attribution, whereas the opposite was true for Democrats and (ii) although Trump supporters reduced their belief in misinformation items following a correction, they did not change their voting preferences. Experiment 2 revealed that the explanation’s source had relatively little impact, and belief updating was more influenced by perceived credibility of the individual initially purporting the information. These findings suggest that people use political figures as a heuristic to guide evaluation of what is true or false, yet do not necessarily insist on veracity as a prerequisite for supporting political candidates.

KW - Belief updating

KW - Continued influence effect

KW - Misinformation

KW - Motivated cognition

KW - Source credibility

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85014613479&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1098/rsos.160802

DO - 10.1098/rsos.160802

M3 - Article

VL - 4

JO - Royal Society Open Science

JF - Royal Society Open Science

SN - 2054-5703

IS - 3

M1 - 160802

ER -