The gap in assessment of one’s own group compared to a group they are not a member of can be widened with the use of statistical baselines. Clinton supporters thought Trump supporters consumed even more fake news when given statistics on the consumption of fake news about people in general. 


University of Delaware

Clinton supporters estimated Trump supporters to consume more fake news than other Clinton supporters, and Trump supporters exhibited the same bias to a lesser degree.

Effect of Group-Centric Bias: Perception of Fake News Consumption Among Different Political Supporters

Lyons, B., Merola, V., & Reifler, J. (2021). How bad is the fake news problem? The role of baseline information in public perceptions. In R. Greifeneder, M. Jaffé, E. J. New- man, & N. Schwarz (Eds.), The psychology of fake news: Accepting, sharing, and correcting misinformation (pp. 11–26). London: Routledge. 

- Goal of the study: Understanding the role of social media in political events. Specifically, investigate how baseline statistics affect the average person’s understanding of the prevalence and severity of the fake news problem.

Results of the study:
- Even groups that weren’t directly related had specific perceptions on how much fake news other groups consumed (E.g., Trump supporters were more likely to think that younger people consumed more fake news)
- No effect of info baselines on perceived overall consumption of fake news
- Having both statistics increased perception that fake news consumption increased, and increased concern of fake news → strong effect size
- Exposure to the pct of Americans exposed to fake news in 2016 decreased support for publicly funded media literacy programs --> WHY? Not answered in discussion

Learn Before

Related