1. It takes more cognitive energy to disbelieve information than it does to believe it. Therefore, people are often automatically more inclined to believe information than they are to disbelieve it.  However, this is usually only true if one is explicitly asked to label the information as true or false.

2. Stimuli that are easier to process are more likely to be perceived as being true. Easy-to-read fonts, rhyming, and repetition, all make information seem more believable.

3. People often use their existing beliefs, schemas, and experiences to interpret information. They rarely remember information as it is presented to them but rather their interpretation of the information they received. Humans are wired to fill in gaps in information which allows for deviations and imperfections.

4. Knowledge is often isolated from when and how it was first learned. When recalling information one may not remember that the source of that information was unreliable. (source monitoring errors)

5. Knowledge is not always applied or readily recalled.(tip of the tongue state)

Properties of the knowledge base that can yield false beliefs

Although source monitoring may help individuals to more accurately evaluate the credibility of information and the source it came from, source monitoring is unlikely to be an effective means for dispelling false beliefs. Recalling the source of information every time one accesses knowledge is cognitively inefficient and unlikely to be consistently practiced. Additionally, a person's judgment regarding the credibility of a source may be inaccurate.

Source monitoring as a method for combating false beliefs 

1. Avoid repeating misinformation
2. Use simple language
3. Use photos
4. Use affirmative statements to instill new and more accurate information rather than just negating false information

Tips for debunking false beliefs 

- interrupted falsehoods
- illusory truth effect
- Tip-of-the-tongue state
- fact checking
-	source monitoring
-	cognitive shortcuts/ properties of the knowledge base

Terms and Concepts Related to False Beliefs

- distribution of corrections: usually not successful
- debunking fake news is sometimes just as difficult as debunking misconceptions


Implications of False Beliefs

Collective delusions are false beliefs that have been spread within societies and amplified in social groups. Collective delusions can have catastrophic social consequences. An example of a harmful collective delusion within society is the belief that climate change is a hoax perpetrated by scientists seeking personal advantage, this can decrease people's intentions to minimize their carbon footprint. Another example is the false belief that pharmaceutical companies hide data about harmful side effects of vaccines which in turn reduces people's intentions to get vaccinated.

Collective Delusions as a Form of False Beliefs

Errors in one's knowledge system that lead them to believe that an inaccurate piece of information is true.

Pepperdine University

- The information appears to be true or is believable 
- Being rewritten in different forms
- Being accessible through multiple sources
- Confirmation Bias 
- Authoritative bias 
- Targeting hot topics
- Indicating urgency
- The Sunk Cost Fallacy 
- emotional appeals 
- False Beliefs
- Labels can lead to errors in assessment of information
- False Memories
- Inaccurate evaluation of information
- Ease of Processing
- Underthinking
- Deliberative processes

Reasons Misinformation Spreads

Marsh, E. J., & Stanley, M. (2020). False beliefs: Byproducts of an adaptive knowledge base? In R. Greifeneder, M. Jaffé, E. J. Newman, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), The psychol- ogy of fake news: Accepting, sharing, and correcting misinformation (pp. 131–146). London: Routledge. 

False beliefs: Byproducts of an adaptive knowledge base? 

Misinformation Gets Attention Through Being Intertwined with Elements of Truth

Misinformation Gets Attention Through Being Rewritten in Different Forms

Misinformation Gets Attention Through Being Accessible Through Multiple Sources

Misinformation Gets Attention Through Targeting Hot Topics

A fallacy where individuals are less likely to give up an investment (financial or emotional) the more time they have put into it. 

The Sunk Cost Fallacy

A bias where individuals are more likely to follow figures of authority/influence. 

Authoritative Bias 

Many aspects of social media make it especially susceptible to the spread of misinformation. 
- Messages are easy to process, therefore easy to believe.
- Credibility is easily established by following friends, who often have similar views (which also establishes compatibility).
- Posts are shared by people you trust, establishes repetition and social consensus.
- Comments and related posts provide supporting evidence and familiarity.
- Users can gain a false sense of expertise, becoming very familiar with one perspective. 
- Lack of opposing ideas on a person’s feed is interpreted as a lack of different ideas overall.


The Susceptibility of Social Media to Misinformation

False Beliefs

Labels can powerfully impact the way one assesses and interacts with information. Some labels have been known to distort perception and cause individuals to jump to inaccurate conclusions or misinterpret information.

The impact of labels on the assessment of information

Misinformation can spread because people are distracted by information other than accuracy. Some of these could include: party alignment, social relevance, or social reinforcement. 

Inattention-Based Account of Misinformation

A false memory is a recollection of an event, or details of an event, that did not actually occur. This phenomenon highlights that human memory is not a perfect, video-like recording of the past but is instead a reconstructive process capable of creating memories for things that never happened.

False Memories

- Cognitive biases 
- Accuracy of information is not a priority when gaining knowledge 
- The source of information is unknown or unreliable 
- Sources are often listed after the information has already been presented and embedded into one's knowledge base
- Evidence for a piece of information is not relevant  but gives the illusion of support 
- Alternative viewpoints are not considered
- Monitoring the accuracy of information takes great effort
- Working against one's own biases is difficult

Reasons for inaccurate evaluation of information

According to a study conducted by Cheng Zhou, Kai Li, and Yanhong Lu, misinformation containing specific linguistic qualities is more likely to be shared on social media. By examining the content of fake news posts and the number of shares, they found that misinformation containing persuasive and uncertainty words were more likely to be shared than true posts. The effect was moderated by the richness of the information. 

Linguistic Traits of Misinformation Online

During a crisis, social media is used to spread information. Anyone can take part in the spreading of information which can be bad. Trust during a crisis is important and if individuals' social media posts are not regulated or fact-checked like those belonging to an organization or agency misinformation spreads. Rumor's and misinformation can cause panic and lead to resources being spent on false leads.

Social Media is Unregulated: Double-edge Sword 

People are more likely to believe a claim that they have been exposed to repeatedly. Repetition increases the perception of social consensus, even when it is just one person’s account being repeated multiple times. The effect of repetition of messages is so strong that it can sway people who are unsure and even convince people who know it is false to accept it.


Repetition of Information

We are more likely to accept information that is easy to process. 


Ease of Processing

When people accept information intuitively, rather than using systematic reasoning to critically analyze it. Can affect people with lower cognitive ability, people who rely on intuitive thinking, and people in situations which elicit underthinking.


Underthinking

- Negative emotional state vs. positive emotional state
- High arousal conditions vs. low arousal conditions
- The cognitive impact of anger 
- Anger and suggestibility
- Anger's effect on speed and confidence 
- Post-truth situation

Influences of emotion on accepting misinformation

Discourse concerning the role of deliberation in the creation of false beliefs from misinformation has been centered on two main perspectives:
- Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R)
- Classical reasoning

Misinformation: Deliberative Processes

Social media algorithms analyze user behavior and prioritize content the platform believes the user wants to see and is most likely to engage with.

Social Media Algorithm

Defined as the extent to which news, regardless of its accuracy, is believed. Calculated as the average of one's belief in true news and belief in false news

Overall belief in fake news

A motivated reasoning account that posits that deliberation causes individuals to belief information (real or fake) that aligns with their political beliefs. This theory hypothesizes that there is a positive association between analytic thinking and perceived accuracy of headlines that align with one's beliefs. 

Motivated System 2 Reasoning (MS2R)

Confirmation bias is the cognitive tendency to selectively focus on cases that validate our pre-existing intuitive beliefs while actively disregarding or forgetting cases that contradict them. This mental shortcut leads individuals to reinforce incorrect assumptions by ignoring disconfirming evidence.

Learn Before

Related

Learn After