Stray Thoughts
Emotion dysregulation and belief in conspiracy theories
Zuzanna Molenda et al.
Personality and Individual Differences, forthcoming
Abstract:
Conspiracy beliefs typically flourish in threatening situations that evoke negative emotions. In the present research, we hypothesized that conspiracy beliefs may therefore serve as a psychological response to difficulties in the domain of emotion regulation (i.e., dysregulation of emotional experiences, expressions, and responses). This hypothesis was tested among British, American, and Polish participants and conceptually replicated across three studies. Specifically, we examined the associations between difficulties in emotion regulation and belief in general notions of conspiracy (Study 1, n = 391 and Study 2, n = 411) and belief in specific conspiracy theories (Study 3, n = 558). Across all three studies, difficulties in emotion regulation positively predicted belief in conspiracy theories. These findings suggest that people having more problems with regulating their emotions may be most prone to believing in conspiracy theories.
Belief in COVID-19 Misinformation: Hopeful Claims are Rated as Truer
Alexandria Stone & Elizabeth Marsh
Applied Cognitive Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Misinformation surrounding COVID-19 spread rapidly and widely, posing a significant threat to public health. Here, we examined whether some types of misinformation are more believable than others, to the extent that they offer people hope in uncertain times. An initial group of subjects rated a series of COVID-19 misinformation statements for whether each made them feel more or less hopeful (if true). Based on these ratings, we selected two sets of misinformation that differed in their average rated hopefulness; the two sets did not differ in word length or reading ease. In two studies, people rated their belief in each statement. Results from both studies revealed that people rated the more hopeful misinformation (e.g., COVID cures and prevention methods) as truer than less hopeful misinformation (e.g., transmission vectors). These findings are consistent with a motivated reasoning account of misinformation acceptance.
Lies and bullshit: The negative effects of misinformation grow stronger over time
John Petrocelli, Catherine Seta & John Seta
Applied Cognitive Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
In a world where exposure to untrustworthy communicators is common, trust has become more important than ever for effective marketing. Nevertheless, we know very little about the long-term consequences of exposure to untrustworthy sources, such bullshitters. This research examines how untrustworthy sources -- liars and bullshitters -- influence consumer attitudes toward a product. Frankfurt's (1986) insidious bullshit hypothesis (i.e., bullshitting is evaluated less negatively than lying but bullshit can be more harmful than are lies) is examined within a traditional sleeper effect -- a persuasive influence that increases, rather than decays over time. We obtained a sleeper effect after participants learned that the source of the message was either a liar or a bullshitter. However, compared to the liar source condition, the same message from a bullshitter resulted in more extreme immediate and delayed attitudes that were in line with an otherwise discounted persuasive message (i.e., an advertisement). Interestingly, attitudes returned to control condition levels when a bullshitter was the source of the message, suggesting that knowing an initially discounted message may be potentially accurate/inaccurate (as is true with bullshit, but not lies) does not result in the long-term discounting of that message. We discuss implications for marketing and other contexts of persuasion.
Sharing of misinformation is habitual, not just lazy or biased
Gizem Ceylan, Ian Anderson & Wendy Wood
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 24 January 2023
Abstract:
Why do people share misinformation on social media? In this research (N = 2,476), we show that the structure of online sharing built into social platforms is more important than individual deficits in critical reasoning and partisan bias -- commonly cited drivers of misinformation. Due to the reward-based learning systems on social media, users form habits of sharing information that attracts others' attention. Once habits form, information sharing is automatically activated by cues on the platform without users considering response outcomes such as spreading misinformation. As a result of user habits, 30 to 40% of the false news shared in our research was due to the 15% most habitual news sharers. Suggesting that sharing of false news is part of a broader response pattern established by social media platforms, habitual users also shared information that challenged their own political beliefs. Finally, we show that sharing of false news is not an inevitable consequence of user habits: Social media sites could be restructured to build habits to share accurate information.
Once (but not twice) upon a time: Narrative inoculation against conjunction errors indirectly reduces conspiracy beliefs and improves truth discernment
Mikey Biddlestone, Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden
Applied Cognitive Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Psychological inoculation has proven effective at reducing susceptibility to misinformation. We present a novel storytelling approach to inoculation against susceptibility to the conjunction fallacy (d-meta-analysis = 0.82), a known cognitive predictor of conspiracy beliefs. In Study 1 (Pilot; N = 161), a narrative inoculation (vs. control) reduced susceptibility to conjunction errors, and in turn, conspiracy beliefs regarding government malfeasance. In Study 2 (main experiment; N = 141; pre-registered), two separate narrative inoculations (vs. control) directly reduced susceptibility to conjunction errors, and indirectly reduced conspiracy beliefs regarding extra-terrestrial cover-ups. In addition, the inoculation messages improved detection of both real and fake news ('truth discernment'). We discuss theoretical and practical implications, including the use of inoculation to induce critical thinking styles, and tailoring inoculations that may suit storytelling mediums.