 - Graham (2018) creates a distinction by measuring the confidence (Certainty) of the subjects to see if it was misinformation or general ignorance about the situation/topic
 - Expressive responding is when people provide misinformation intentionally to reaffirm their partisanship (Schaffner & Luks 2018) and is thought to be a difference between the respondent's true beliefs and the ones they report. Perhaps those that respond like this if asked about how they got to their conclusion, would be more likely to relay party talking points.
 - 
 

New York University

 - Evidence to support that where the false information is interpreted as a singular event, correction is more successful as it is deemed a one-time event and not necessarily a threat to their existing identity/affiliation. (Ecker & Ang 2019)
 -  When the information being corrected is not a hotly debated issue and is less central to a person's worldview, there is no longer that intrinsic motivation to defend and adhere to misinformation.
 - However, this study used hypothetical politicians which may have led to these results

How the Type of Issue Affects the Effectiveness of Correction

This research paper explains the potential psychology behind political misinformation, as well as how the issue type and source of the correction of misinformation may affect the effectiveness of the correction. They also include where the literature has not yet developed and how measurement methods may be involved. 

Political Misinformation Methods of Correction by Jennifer Jerit and Yangzi Zhao

 - Berinsky (2017) found that if the source of the correction is someone from one's own party speaking out against party interests they become more trustworthy and the correction is more readily accepted 
 -  Bode & Vraga (2015) found that if the source of the information is considered to be apolitical, like an algorithm, it is often considered more trustworthy and more readily accepted by the person. The threat is considered reduced or nonexistent.

Learn Before

Related