Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation

Recent years have seen a surge in research on why people fall for misinformation and what can be done about it. Drawing on a framework that conceptualizes truth judgments of true and false information as a signal-detection problem, the current article identifies three inaccurate assumptions in the public and scientific discourse about misinformation: (1) People are bad at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias is not a driving force in judgments of misinformation, and (3) gullibility to false information is the main factor underlying inaccurate beliefs. Counter to these assumptions, we argue that (1) people are quite good at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive and strong, and (3) skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to belief-congruent false information. These conclusions have significant implications for person-centered misinformation interventions to tackle inaccurate beliefs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Published
2024-11-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214241280907
Citations
6
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.79

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation

Bertram Gawronski, Nyx L. Ng, Lea S. Nahon
6 citations
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Misinformation and Its Impacts
6.79
article

Debunking Three Myths About Misinformation

Bertram Gawronski, Nyx L. Ng, Lea S. Nahon
article en
6 citations

Abstract

Recent years have seen a surge in research on why people fall for misinformation and what can be done about it. Drawing on a framework that conceptualizes truth judgments of true and false information as a signal-detection problem, the current article identifies three inaccurate assumptions in the public and scientific discourse about misinformation: (1) People are bad at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias is not a driving force in judgments of misinformation, and (3) gullibility to false information is the main factor underlying inaccurate beliefs. Counter to these assumptions, we argue that (1) people are quite good at discerning true from false information, (2) partisan bias in responses to true and false information is pervasive and strong, and (3) skepticism against belief-incongruent true information is much more pronounced than gullibility to belief-congruent false information. These conclusions have significant implications for person-centered misinformation interventions to tackle inaccurate beliefs.

Current Directions in Psychological ScienceVol. 34(1)
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
National Science Foundation, John Templeton Foundation, Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
6.79
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.