Some new research, however, seems to partially contradict those findings. A study forthcoming in Political Behavior, from Ohio State University’s Thomas Wood and George Washington University’s Ethan Porter, suggests the “backfire effect” is uncommon. “Overwhelmingly, when presented with factual information that corrects politicians — even when the politician is an ally — the average subject accedes to the correction and distances himself from the inaccurate claim.”
In 2015 Nyhan and Reifler teamed up again on a study that looked at attempts to correct misperceptions about the flu vaccine. A nationally representative survey experiment found that explaining that the vaccine does not give humans the flu helped to clear up misconceptions about the vaccine and its safety. But imparting this new information had consequences, too: Among the study participants most worried about vaccine side effects, the probability of their saying they were likely to get the vaccine fell from 46 percent to 28 percent.
Those results are consistent with findings from prior research on efforts to correct myths about the measles-mumps-rubella, or MMR, vaccine. “Corrective information reduced beliefs that the MMR vaccine causes autism but still decreases intent to vaccinate among parents with the least favorable vaccine attitudes,” write Nyhan and Reifler, who authored that study as well.
But there’s also fresh evidence that the same technology that helps to spread false information can be used as a tool to contain it. A recent article in Political Communication suggests social network relationships may stem the flow of bad information — at least on Twitter. The study, led by Drew B. Margolin of Cornell University, showed that Twitter users who made false statements were more likely to accept corrections from friends and individuals who followed them.
What don’t we know?
While the new focus on false news has generated a lot of new scholarship, plenty about the phenomenon remains a mystery.
For one, much of the new research centers on U.S. politics and, specifically, elections. But social networks drive conversations about many other topics such as business, education, health, and personal relationships. To battle bad online information, it would be helpful to know whether people respond to these sorts of topics differently than they respond to information about political candidates and elections. It also would be useful to know whether myths about certain subjects — for instance, a business product or education trend — are trickier to correct than others.
As the 16 academics pointed out in “The Science of Fake News,” there’s a need for a more interdisciplinary approach to the problem.
The group, which includes social scientists and legal scholars, also stresses the need to learn more about platform-based detection and interventions. In their call to action, they urge leaders at Google, Facebook, and other online platforms to help researchers understand how those platforms filter information. “There are challenges to scientific collaboration from the perspectives of industry and academia,” they write. “Yet, there is an ethical and social responsibility, transcending market forces, for the platforms to contribute what data they uniquely can to a science of fake news.”
About the author: Denise-Marie Ordway is the managing editor of Journalist’s Resource, a project of Harvard’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy aimed at bridging the gap between journalism and academia. Its primary goal is to help journalists improve their work by relying more often on scientific evidence and high-quality, peer-reviewed research.
Last updated: July 19, 2018
More Articles
- Antony Blinken, Secretary of State: Building A More Resilient Information Environment
- Hope: A Research-based Explainer by Naseem S. Miller, The Journalist's Resource
- "The 2022 midterm election returns could ... be marred by a rush to judgment by political leaders or news outlets"* Harvard Kennedy School Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy
- Encountering the News From the British Library's Breaking the News Exhibition: Unsettling, But Exciting
- GAO, COVID-19: State [Department] Carried Out Historic Repatriation Effort but Should Strengthen Its Preparedness for Future Crises
- Voting Rights: Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke Testifies Before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing; “One of the most monumental laws in the entire history of American freedom”
- Jo Freeman Reviews Electing Madam Vice President by Nichola D. Gutgold
- Brennan Center: One in Three Election Officials Report Feeling Unsafe Because of Their Job
- From Medicare: Protect Yourself - If Someone Contacts You to Buy or Sell a Vaccination Card, It's a Scam; Key Things to Know From the CDC
- New York's Jewish Museum: Photography and the American Magazine; When Avant-garde Techniques in Photography and Design Reached the United States via European Emigrés