2024/11/01 by Toby Prike, Joseph Baker, Ullrich K. H. Ecker · 2 voices · 2 citations
Computer Science · Psychology · Social Sciences · #Feeling #Hate Speech and Cyberbullying Detection #Law #Misinformation #Misinformation and Its Impacts #Political science #Psychology #Social Media and Politics #Social psychology
paper · pdf · doi:10.1111/pops.13059
published in Political Psychology 46(5), 1081-1100 (Wiley)
openalex publication_date 2024/11/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
Abstract Making misleading statements may benefit a politician, for example, during an election campaign. However, there are potentially also negative consequences; political misinformation can taint democratic debate, voters may be misled into forming false beliefs, and being fact‐checked may damage a politician's reputation. Previous research has found that correcting misleading statements made by established politicians reduces topical misperceptions, but hardly affects voter feelings and support. Here, we examined the impact of political misinformation and fact‐checking when politicians are unfamiliar. Participants ( N = 406) were engaged in a simulated election campaign set in an unfamiliar country, featuring statements from fictional candidates. Participants indicated their feelings toward the candidates, cast a vote, and rated their belief in the fact‐checked statements. Misleading statements that were not corrected positively affected feelings toward and voting for (right‐leaning) politicians. Corrective fact‐checks had large effects, reducing belief in misinformation, and fact‐checked candidates were viewed much less favorably and attracted far fewer votes. This demonstrates that in the absence of strong pre‐existing attitudes, corrective fact‐checks can negatively impact misinformation‐spreading politicians who are not (yet) well known.