Misinformation is widespread, but only some people fall for the false information they encounter. This raises two questions: Who falls for misinformation, and why do they fall for misinformation? To address these questions, two studies investigated associations between 15 individual-difference dimensions and judgments of misinformation as true. Using Signal Detection Theory, the studies further investigated whether the obtained associations are driven by individual differences in truth sensitivity, acceptance threshold, or myside bias. For both political misinformation (Study 1) and misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines (Study 2), truth sensitivity was positively associated with cognitive reflection and actively open-minded thinking, and negatively associated with bullshit receptivity and conspiracy mentality. Although acceptance threshold and myside bias explained considerable variance in judgments of misinformation as true, neither showed robust associations with the measured individual-difference dimensions. The findings provide deeper insights into individual differences in misinformation susceptibility and uncover critical gaps in their scientific understanding.
tl;dr - literally idiots fall for misinfo.
Summary on “Who Falls for Misinformation and Why?” by Hubeny, Nahon, Ng, and Gawronski.
Study Overview
This research investigated who falls for misinformation and why, using Signal Detection Theory (SDT) to identify three distinct factors affecting misinformation susceptibility:
The researchers conducted two studies examining associations between 15 individual-difference dimensions and misinformation susceptibility: Study 1 with political misinformation (274 participants) and Study 2 with COVID-19 vaccine misinformation (222 participants).
Key Findings
Who Falls for Misinformation
People were more likely to believe misinformation if they had:
Why They Fall for Misinformation
The research revealed these associations were primarily driven by differences in truth sensitivity. People with high cognitive reflection and actively open-minded thinking showed better ability to distinguish true from false information, while those high in bullshit receptivity and conspiracy mentality showed poorer ability.
A bifactor model analysis revealed these four dimensions are largely driven by a single underlying factor the authors call “reflective open-mindedness.”
Acceptance Threshold and Myside Bias
While individual differences in acceptance threshold and myside bias both contributed to misinformation susceptibility, none of the 15 individual-difference dimensions showed reliable associations with these factors across both studies.
Theoretical Contributions
This research suggests that while we understand what makes people better at distinguishing true from false information (truth sensitivity), we don’t yet understand what makes some people have higher acceptance thresholds or show stronger myside bias.
That’s a great synopsis of the study. Did you write that yourself or use some tool to derive the summary?
Either way, I’m sure folks here appreciate the effort. Thanks.
I used Claude. I know … AI bad. But for long reads it helps a lot.
i guess it’s a good motivation to go actually read the paper. i can’t stand not knowing if the summary i just read was accurate or not (and i’m assuming that you didn’t go double check yourself, either. not hating, but it is a known downside to using AI summaries)
… oh, do you (the reader) want to know if it was accurate? guess you’ll also have to read the study to find out :p
seems especially relevant when talking about a study related to discerning truth from false
I skimmed. It seems to have the general idea.