They might be a liar but they’re my liar: Source evaluation and the prevalence of misinformation

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Even if people acknowledge that misinformation is incorrect after a correction has been presented, their feelings towards the source of the misinformation can remain unchanged. The current study investigated whether participants reduce their support of Republican and Democratic politicians when the prevalence of misinformation disseminated by the politicians appears to be high in comparison to the prevalence of their factual statements. We presented U.S. participants either with (1) equal numbers of false and factual statements from political candidates or (2) disproportionately more false than factual statements. Participants received fact-checks as to whether items were true or false, then rerated both their belief in the statements as well as their feelings towards the candidate. Results indicated that when corrected misinformation was presented alongside equal presentations of affirmed factual statements, participants reduced their belief in the misinformation but did not reduce their feelings towards the politician. However, if there was considerably more misinformation retracted than factual statements affirmed, feelings towards both Republican and Democratic figures were reduced—although the observed effect size was extremely small.

Original languageEnglish
Number of pages14
JournalPolitical Psychology
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 13 Apr 2019

Fingerprint

Communication
Emotions
evaluation
politician
candidacy
Liar
Evaluation
Politicians
Republican

Cite this

@article{958dc4522288439ea34d822fc1c53aa9,
title = "They might be a liar but they’re my liar: Source evaluation and the prevalence of misinformation",
abstract = "Even if people acknowledge that misinformation is incorrect after a correction has been presented, their feelings towards the source of the misinformation can remain unchanged. The current study investigated whether participants reduce their support of Republican and Democratic politicians when the prevalence of misinformation disseminated by the politicians appears to be high in comparison to the prevalence of their factual statements. We presented U.S. participants either with (1) equal numbers of false and factual statements from political candidates or (2) disproportionately more false than factual statements. Participants received fact-checks as to whether items were true or false, then rerated both their belief in the statements as well as their feelings towards the candidate. Results indicated that when corrected misinformation was presented alongside equal presentations of affirmed factual statements, participants reduced their belief in the misinformation but did not reduce their feelings towards the politician. However, if there was considerably more misinformation retracted than factual statements affirmed, feelings towards both Republican and Democratic figures were reduced—although the observed effect size was extremely small.",
keywords = "belief updating, fact checking, misinformation, source credibility, The continued influence effect",
author = "Briony Swire-Thompson and Ecker, {Ullrich K.H.} and Stephan Lewandowsky and Berinsky, {Adam J.}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "13",
doi = "10.1111/pops.12586",
language = "English",
journal = "Political Psychology",
issn = "0162-895X",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

They might be a liar but they’re my liar : Source evaluation and the prevalence of misinformation. / Swire-Thompson, Briony; Ecker, Ullrich K.H.; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Berinsky, Adam J.

In: Political Psychology, 13.04.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - They might be a liar but they’re my liar

T2 - Source evaluation and the prevalence of misinformation

AU - Swire-Thompson, Briony

AU - Ecker, Ullrich K.H.

AU - Lewandowsky, Stephan

AU - Berinsky, Adam J.

PY - 2019/4/13

Y1 - 2019/4/13

N2 - Even if people acknowledge that misinformation is incorrect after a correction has been presented, their feelings towards the source of the misinformation can remain unchanged. The current study investigated whether participants reduce their support of Republican and Democratic politicians when the prevalence of misinformation disseminated by the politicians appears to be high in comparison to the prevalence of their factual statements. We presented U.S. participants either with (1) equal numbers of false and factual statements from political candidates or (2) disproportionately more false than factual statements. Participants received fact-checks as to whether items were true or false, then rerated both their belief in the statements as well as their feelings towards the candidate. Results indicated that when corrected misinformation was presented alongside equal presentations of affirmed factual statements, participants reduced their belief in the misinformation but did not reduce their feelings towards the politician. However, if there was considerably more misinformation retracted than factual statements affirmed, feelings towards both Republican and Democratic figures were reduced—although the observed effect size was extremely small.

AB - Even if people acknowledge that misinformation is incorrect after a correction has been presented, their feelings towards the source of the misinformation can remain unchanged. The current study investigated whether participants reduce their support of Republican and Democratic politicians when the prevalence of misinformation disseminated by the politicians appears to be high in comparison to the prevalence of their factual statements. We presented U.S. participants either with (1) equal numbers of false and factual statements from political candidates or (2) disproportionately more false than factual statements. Participants received fact-checks as to whether items were true or false, then rerated both their belief in the statements as well as their feelings towards the candidate. Results indicated that when corrected misinformation was presented alongside equal presentations of affirmed factual statements, participants reduced their belief in the misinformation but did not reduce their feelings towards the politician. However, if there was considerably more misinformation retracted than factual statements affirmed, feelings towards both Republican and Democratic figures were reduced—although the observed effect size was extremely small.

KW - belief updating

KW - fact checking

KW - misinformation

KW - source credibility

KW - The continued influence effect

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064494667&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/pops.12586

DO - 10.1111/pops.12586

M3 - Article

JO - Political Psychology

JF - Political Psychology

SN - 0162-895X

ER -