Cognitive science and fake news belief: an exploratory study

Authors

  • João Pedro Baptista Departamento de Comunicação, Filosofia e Política, Universidade da Beira Interior (UBI), Covilhã, Portugal
  • Elisete Correia Centro de Matemática Computacional e Estocástica (CEMAT), Dep. de Matemática, IST-UL, Lisboa, Portugal
  • Anabela Gradim Departamento de Comunicação, Filosofia e Política, Universidade da Beira Interior (UBI), Covilhã, Portugal
  • Valeriano Piñeiro-Naval Observatorio de los Contenidos Audiovisuales, Universidade de Salamanca, Salamanca, Espanha

Keywords:

Fake news, cognition, bullshits, disinformation, belief

Abstract

The way we process information can determine the ability to discern fake news from news. This study aims to understand how the psychological and cognitive aspects are related to the consumption and dissemination of fake news. We applied a survey to 712 participants, who rated the credibility of a set of fake news and news headlines. Subsequently, to determine a psychological profile, we assessed the cognitive ability, the degree of claiming exaggerated knowledge and the receptivity to bullshits of the participants. We found that analytical thinking can combat the consumption and spread of fake news. The belief in fake news is associated with intuition, the claim of excessive knowledge and the acceptance of bullshit. People most interested in political news are less likely to believe fake news and bullshit. Thus, political knowledge and reflective reasoning can be crucial elements in resisting political disinformation.

Author Biography

João Pedro Baptista, Departamento de Comunicação, Filosofia e Política, Universidade da Beira Interior (UBI), Covilhã, Portugal

João Pedro Baptista é um jornalista e investigador da unidade de Investigação Labcom – Comunicação e Artes, do Departamento de Comunicação, Filosofia e Política da Universidade da Beira Interior, em Portugal. É mestre em Ciências da Comunicação: Comunicação Pública, Política e Intercultural pela Universidade de Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro e, atualmente, bolseiro de Doutoramento em Ciências da Comunicação, pela Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT), na Universidade da Beira Interior. Os interesses da sua investigação prendem-se com a crescente problemática das fake news e da desinformação online, bem como com o estudo da situação da dicotomia política Esquerda-Direita enquadrada com o estudo da comunicação político-partidária.

References

Ali, K., & Zain-ul-abdin, K. (2020). Post-truth propaganda: heuristic processing of political fake news on Facebook during the 2016 US presidential election. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 1–20.

Allcott, H., Gentzkow, M., & Yu, C. (2019). Trends in the diffusion of misinformation on social media. Research and Politics, 6(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019848554

Allcott, Hunt, & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211

Amazeen, M. A., & Bucy, E. P. (2019). Conferring resistance to digital disinformation: The inoculating influence of procedural news knowledge. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63(3), 415–432.

Bago, B., Rand, D. G., & Pennycook, G. (2020). Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.

Baptista, J. (2020). Ethos, pathos e logos. Análise comparativa do processo persuasivo das (fake) news. Eikon, 1(7).

Baptista, J.P., & Gradim, A. (2020a). Online disinformation on Facebook: the spread of fake news during the Portuguese 2019 election. Journal of Contemporary European Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/14782804.2020.1843415

Baptista, J.P., & Gradim, A. (2020b). Understanding fake news consumption: A review. Social Sciences, 9(10), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci9100185

Baptista, João Pedro, & Gradim, A. (2021). “Brave New World” of fake news: how it works. Javnost - The Public.

Baptista, J.P., Correia, E., Gradim, A., & Piñeiro-Naval, V. (2021). The Influence of Political Ideology on Fake News Belief: The Portuguese Case. Publications (in press).

Barnidge, M., Gunther, A. C., Kim, J., Hong, Y., Perryman, M., Tay, S. K., & Knisely, S. (2020). Politically motivated selective exposure and perceived media bias. Communication Research, 47(1), 82–103.

Barron, D., Furnham, A., Weis, L., Morgan, K. D., Towell, T., & Swami, V. (2018). The relationship between schizotypal facets and conspiracist beliefs via cognitive processes. Psychiatry Research, 259, 15–20.

Bellur, S., & Sundar, S. S. (2014). How can we tell when a heuristic has been used? Design and analysis strategies for capturing the operation of heuristics. Communication Methods and Measures, 8(2), 116–137.

Bennett, W. L., & Livingston, S. (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122–139. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323118760317

Bing, M. N., Kluemper, D., Kristl Davison, H., Taylor, S., & Novicevic, M. (2011). Overclaiming as a measure of faking. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 116(1), 148–162. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2011.05.006

Bronstein, M. V, Pennycook, G., Bear, A., Rand, D. G., & Cannon, T. D. (2019). Belief in fake news is associated with delusionality, dogmatism, religious fundamentalism, and reduced analytic thinking. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8(1), 108–117.

Câncio, F. (2020). ERC regista como “informativo” site de desinformação e propaganda. Diário de Notícias. https://www.dn.pt/edicao-do-dia/27-jan-2020/erc-regista-como-informativo-site-de-desinformacao-e-propaganda-11751353.html

Cano-Orón, L., Calvo, D., García, G. L., & Baviera, T. (2021). Disinformation in Facebook ads in the 2019 spanish general election campaigns. Media and Communication, 9(1), 217–228.

Cardoso, G., Moreno, J., & Narciso, P. (2019a). Social Media disinformation in the pre-electoral period in Portugal.

Cardoso, G., Paisana, M., & Pinto-Martinho, A. (2019b). The Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism: Reuters Digital News Report 2019 - Portugal. In Publicações OberCom. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.987545

Cardoso, G., Paisana, M., & Pinto-Martinho, A. (2020b). Reuters Digital News Report 2020 Portugal.

Cardoso, G., Pinto-Martinho, A., Narciso, I., Moreno, J., Crespo, M., Palma, N., & Sepúlveda, R. (2020a). Information and Misinformation on the Coronavirus in Portugal. Whatsapp, Facebook and Google Searches.

Cinelli, M., Cresci, S., Galeazzi, A., Quattrociocchi, W., & Tesconi, M. (2020). The limited reach of fake news on Twitter during 2019 European elections. PloS One, 15(6), e0234689.

Clayton, K., Blair, S., Busam, J. A., Forstner, S., Glance, J., Green, G., Kawata, A., Kovvuri, A., Martin, J., & Morgan, E. (2019). Real solutions for fake news? Measuring the effectiveness of general warnings and fact-check tags in reducing belief in false stories on social media. Political Behavior, 1–23.

Culloty, E., & Suiter, J. (2021). Anti-immigration disinformation. In The Routledge Companion to Media Disinformation and Populism (pp. 221–230). Routledge.

Del Vicario, M., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Stanley, H. E., & Quattrociocchi, W. (2016). The spreading of misinformation online. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113(3), 554 LP – 559. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517441113

Ditto, P. H., Liu, B. S., Clark, C. J., Wojcik, S. P., Chen, E. E., Grady, R. H., Celniker, J. B., & Zinger, J. F. (2019). At least bias is bipartisan: A meta-analytic comparison of partisan bias in liberals and conservatives. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 14(2), 273–291.

Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 59, 255–278.

Evans, J. S., & Stanovich, K. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241.

Fallis, D., & Mathiesen, K. (2019). Fake news is counterfeit news. Inquiry, 1–20.

Faragó, L., Kende, A., & Krekó, P. (2019). We only believe in news that we doctored ourselves: The connection between partisanship and political fake news. Social Psychology.

Fazio, L. (2020). Pausing to consider why a headline is true or false can help reduce the sharing of false news. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 1(2).

Feeney, J. R., & Goffin, R. D. (2015). The Overclaiming Questionnaire: A good way to measure faking? Personality and Individual Differences, 82, 248–252. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.03.038

Ferrara, E. (2017). Disinformation and social bot in the run up to the 2017 French presidential election. First Monday, 22(8), 33.

Figeac, J., Smyrnaios, N., Salord, T., Cabanac, G., Fraisier, O., Ratinaud, P., & Seffusatti, F. (2020). Information-sharing practices on Facebook during the 2017 French presidential campaign: An “unreliable information bubble” within the extreme right. Communications. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2019-0193

Frankfurt, H. G. (2005). On bullshit. Princeton University Press.

Frederick, S. (2005). Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 19(4), 25–42.

Freelon, D., Marwick, A., & Kreiss, D. (2020). False equivalencies: Online activism from left to right. Science, 369(6508), 1197–1201.

Galeotti, A. E. (2019). Believing fake news. In A. Condello & T. Andina (Eds.), Post-Truth, Philosophy and Law (p. 58). Routledge.

Gelfert, A. (2018). Fake news: A definition. Informal Logic, 38(1), 84–117.

Gentzkow, M. (2016). Polarization in 2016. Toulouse Network for Information Technology Whitepaper, 1–23.

Gorman, S. E., & Gorman, J. M. (2016). Denying to the grave: Why we ignore the facts that will save us. Oxford University Press.

Grinberg, N., Joseph, K., Friedland, L., Swire-Thompson, B., & Lazer, D. (2019). Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374 LP – 378. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau2706

Guess, A. M., Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2020). Exposure to untrustworthy websites in the 2016 US election. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 472–480. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0833-x

Guess, A., Nagler, J., & Tucker, J. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances, 5(1), eaau4586.

Guo, L., A. Rohde, J., & Wu, H. D. (2020). Who is responsible for Twitter’s echo chamber problem? Evidence from 2016 US election networks. Information, Communication & Society, 23(2), 234–251.

Horne, B. D., & Adali, S. (2017). This just in: Fake news packs a lot in title, uses simpler, repetitive content in text body, more similar to satire than real news. Eleventh International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.

Humprecht, E. (2019). Where ‘fake news’ flourishes: a comparison across four Western democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 22(13), 1973–1988. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2018.1474241

ISCTE. (2019). Disinformation risks in Portugal’s election more Brazil than Europe? Risk assessment: online manipulation ahead of the portuguese parliamentary elections.

Jaster, R., & Lanius, D. (n.d.). Speaking of Fake News: Definitions and Dimensions. In S. Bernecker, A. Flowerree, & T. Grundmann (Eds.), The Epistemology of Fake News. Oxford University Press.

Jaster, R., & Lanius, D. (2018). What is fake news? Versus, 47(2), 207–224.

Jones-Jang, S. M., Mortensen, T., & Liu, J. (2019). Does Media Literacy Help Identification of Fake News? Information Literacy Helps, but Other Literacies Don’t. American Behavioral Scientist. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764219869406

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Macmillan.

Krueger, J. I., Vogrincic-Haselbacher, C., & Evans, A. M. (2019). We need a credible theory of gullibility. Forgas, JP & Baumeister, RF.

Lee, J. J., Kang, K.-A., Wang, M. P., Zhao, S. Z., Wong, J. Y. H., O’Connor, S., Yang, S. C., & Shin, S. (2020). Associations between COVID-19 misinformation exposure and belief with COVID-19 knowledge and preventive behaviors: cross-sectional online study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 22(11), e22205.

Lorenz-Spreen, P., Lewandowsky, S., Sunstein, C. R., & Hertwig, R. (2020). How behavioural sciences can promote truth, autonomy and democratic discourse online. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(11), 1102–1109. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0889-7

Luhmann, N. (1979). Trust and power (Chichester).

Martel, C., Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. (2019). Reliance on emotion promotes belief in fake news.

Marwick, A., & Lewis, R. (2017). Media manipulation and disinformation online. In New York: Data & Society Research Institute.

McKay, S., & Tenove, C. (2020). Disinformation as a Threat to Deliberative Democracy. Political Research Quarterly, 1065912920938143.

Metzger, M. J., Flanagin, A. J., & Medders, R. B. (2010). Social and heuristic approaches to credibility evaluation online. Journal of Communication, 60(3), 413–439.

Mihailidis, P., & Viotty, S. (2017). Spreadable Spectacle in Digital Culture: Civic Expression, Fake News, and the Role of Media Literacies in “Post-Fact” Society. American Behavioral Scientist, 61(4), 441–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217701217

Morstatter, F., Shao, Y., Galstyan, A., & Karunasekera, S. (2018). From alt-right to alt-rechts: Twitter analysis of the 2017 german federal election. Companion Proceedings of the The Web Conference 2018, 621–628.

Mukerji, N. (2018). What is Fake News? Ergo: An Open Access Journal of Philosophy, 5.

Nelson, J. L., & Taneja, H. (2018). The small, disloyal fake news audience: The role of audience availability in fake news consumption. New Media and Society, 20(10), 3720–3737. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818758715

Newman, N., Fletcher, R., Kalogeropoulos, A., Levy, D. A. L., & Kleis Nielsen, R. (2018). Digital News Report 2018 (Issue 44). https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/digital-news-report-2018.pdf

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220.

Paulhus, D. L., Harms, P. D., Bruce, M. N., & Lysy, D. C. (2003). The over-claiming technique: Measuring self-enhancement independent of ability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 890.

Pena, P. (2019). Fábrica de mentiras. Viagem ao mundo das Fake News. (1oedition). Objectiva.

Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2019a). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.06.011

Pennycook, Gordon, Cannon, T. D., & Rand, D. G. (2018). Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.

Pennycook, Gordon, Cheyne, J. A., Barr, N., Koehler, D. J., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2015). On the reception and detection of pseudo-profound bullshit. Judgment and Decision Making, 10(6), 549–563.

Pennycook, Gordon, & Rand, D. (2020). The Cognitive Science of Fake News.

Pennycook, Gordon, & Rand, D. (2021). Examining false beliefs about voter fraud in the wake of the 2020 Presidential Election.

Pennycook, Gordon, & Rand, D. G. (2019b). Who falls for fake news? The roles of bullshit receptivity, overclaiming, familiarity, and analytic thinking. Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12476

Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Communication and persuasion (pp. 1–24). Springer.

Pierri, F., Artoni, A., & Ceri, S. (2020). Investigating Italian disinformation spreading on Twitter in the context of 2019 European elections. PloS One, 15(1), e0227821.

Pop, M.-I., & Ene, I. (2019). Influence of the educational level on the spreading of Fake News regarding the energy field in the online environment. Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, 13(1), 1108–1117.

Ramírez-Dueñas, J. M., & Vinuesa-Tejero, M. L. (2021). How does selective exposure affect partisan polarisation? Media consumption on electoral campaigns. The Journal of International Communication, 1–25.

Rini, R. (2017). Fake news and partisan epistemology. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 27(2), E-43-E-64. https://doi.org/10.1353/ken.2017.0025

Rini, Regina. (2017). Fake news and partisan epistemology. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal, 27(2), E-43.

Roets, A. (2017). ‘Fake news’: Incorrect, but hard to correct. The role of cognitive ability on the impact of false information on social impressions. Intelligence, 65, 107–110.

Ross, R. M., Rand, D. G., & Pennycook, G. (2021). Beyond" fake news": Analytic thinking and the detection of false and hyperpartisan news headlines. Judgment & Decision Making, 16(2).

Salaverría, R., Buslón, N., López-Pan, F., León, B., López-Goñi, I., & Erviti, M.-C. (2020). Disinformation in times of pandemic: Typology of hoaxes on Covid-19 | Desinformación en tiempos de pandemia: Tipología de los bulos sobre la Covid-19. Profesional de La Informacion, 29(3), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.may.15

Salvi, C., Iannello, P., McClay, M., Rago, S., Dunsmoor, J. E., & Antonietti, A. (2021). Going viral: How fear, socio-cognitive polarization and problem-solving influence fake news detection and proliferation during COVID-19 pandemic. Frontiers in Communication, 5, 127.

Schwarz, N., & Jalbert, M. (2021). When (fake) News feels true. –Stephan Lewandowsky, Cognitive Science, 73.

Shin, J., & Thorson, K. (2017). Partisan selective sharing: The biased diffusion of fact-checking messages on social media. Journal of Communication, 67(2), 233–255.

Silverman, C. (2016). This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook. Buzzfeednews.

Sirota, M., Kostovičová, L., Juanchich, M., Dewberry, C., & Marshall, A. C. (2018). Measuring Cognitive Reflection without maths: developing and validating the verbal Cognitive Reflection Test.

Spiegel. (2016, February 24). Lying press? Germans lose faith in the fourth estate. Spiegel.

Spohr, D. (2017). Fake news and ideological polarization: Filter bubbles and selective exposure on social media. Business Information Review, 34(3), 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266382117722446

Stanley, M. L., Barr, N., Peters, K., & Seli, P. (2020). Analytic-thinking predicts hoax beliefs and helping behaviors in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Thinking & Reasoning, 1–14.

Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (2000). Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23(5), 645–665. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X00003435

Stelzenmüller, C. (2017). The impact of Russian interference on Germany’s 2017 elections. Testimony before the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence June, 28. https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/sfr-cstelzenmuller-062817b.pdf

Stupple, E. J. N., Pitchford, M., Ball, L. J., Hunt, T. E., & Steel, R. (2017). Slower is not always better: Response-time evidence clarifies the limited role of miserly information processing in the Cognitive Reflection Test. PloS One, 12(11), e0186404.

Swami, V., Voracek, M., Stieger, S., Tran, U. S., & Furnham, A. (2014). Analytic thinking reduces belief in conspiracy theories. Cognition, 133(3), 572–585.

Tagliabue, F., Galassi, L., & Mariani, P. (2020). The “pandemic” of disinformation in COVID-19. SN Comprehensive Clinical Medicine, 2(9), 1287–1289.

Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W., & Ling, R. (2018). Defining “Fake News”: A typology of scholarly definitions. Digital Journalism, 6(2), 137–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143

Tenove, C. (2020). Protecting Democracy from Disinformation: Normative Threats and Policy Responses. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 1940161220918740.

Thomson, K. S., & Oppenheimer, D. M. (2016). Investigating an alternate form of the cognitive reflection test. Judgment and Decision Making, 11(1), 99.

Thorson, E. (2016). Belief echoes: The persistent effects of corrected misinformation. Political Communication, 33(3), 460–480.

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., & Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: An expansion of the Cognitive Reflection Test. Thinking & Reasoning, 20(2), 147–168.

Tripodi, F. (2018). Searching for alternative facts. In Data & Society.

Uscinski, J. E., Klofstad, C., & Atkinson, M. D. (2016). What drives conspiratorial beliefs? The role of informational cues and predispositions. Political Research Quarterly, 69(1), 57–71.

Van Bavel, J. J., & Pereira, A. (2018). The Partisan Brain: An Identity-Based Model of Political Belief. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(3), 213–224. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.01.004

van der Linden, S., Panagopoulos, C., & Roozenbeek, J. (2020). You are fake news: political bias in perceptions of fake news. Media, Culture and Society, 42(3), 460–470. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720906992

Van Prooijen, J.-W., Krouwel, A. P. M., & Pollet, T. V. (2015). Political extremism predicts belief in conspiracy theories. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 6(5), 570–578.

Vegetti, F., & Mancosu, M. (2020). The impact of political sophistication and motivated reasoning on misinformation. Political Communication, 37(5), 678–695.

Wardle, C., & Derakhshan, H. (2017). Information disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policy making. Council of Europe Report, 27.

Weisbuch, M., & Mackie, D. (2009). False fame, perceptual clarity, or persuasion? Flexible fluency attribution in spokesperson familiarity effects. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19(1), 62–72. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcps.2008.12.009

Wiggins, B. E. (2017). Navigating an immersive narratology: Factors to explain the reception of fake news. International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP), 8(3), 16–29.

Woods, H. S., & Hahner, L. A. (2019). Make America meme again: The rhetoric of the Alt-right. Peter Lang Incorporated, International Academic Publishers.

Zimmer, F., Scheibe, K., Stock, M., & Stock, W. G. (2019). Echo chambers and filter bubbles of fake news in social media. Man-made or produced by algorithms. 8th Annual Arts, Humanities, Social Sciences & Education Conference, 1–22.

Downloads

Published

2021-07-23

Issue

No. 9 (2021): Edição de Julho de 2021

Section

Artigos

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).