Fake news in the age of COVID-19: evolutional and psychobiological considerations.

Q3 Medicine
Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki Pub Date : 2022-09-19 Epub Date: 2022-07-19 DOI:10.22365/jpsych.2022.087
Orestis Giotakos
{"title":"Fake news in the age of COVID-19: evolutional and psychobiological considerations.","authors":"Orestis Giotakos","doi":"10.22365/jpsych.2022.087","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The COVID-19 outbreak has been accompanied by a massive infodemic: an overabundance of information, some accurate and some not. At this pandemic we have seen a large scale of fake news and misinformation, leading to anti-vaccine, anti-mask, and anti-5G protests.1 Fake news is intentionally misleading and deceptive news that is written and published with the intent to damage an entity or a person. They may contain false, misleading, imposter, manipulated or fabricated content. Much of the discourse on fake news conflates three notions, named \"information disorders\": (a) Misinformation: false information someone shares without knowing it's untrue, (b) Disinformation: false information that's shared with the intention to harm or mislead, and (c) Malinformation: true information that's used to harm others.2 False beliefs generally arise through the same mechanisms that establish accurate beliefs. People appear to encode all new information as if it were true and later tag the information as being either true or false. Different cognitive, social and affective factors lead people to form or endorse misinformed views. The emotional content of the information shared also affects false-belief formation. An angry mood can boost misinformation sharing, while social exclusion, which is likely to induce a negative mood, can increase susceptibility to conspiratorial content.3 As shown by the Illusory Truth Effect, repeated exposure to an article, whether real or fake, increases people's perceptions of its accuracy. In social media, falsehood seems to diffuse significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects are more pronounced for false political news than for false news about terrorism, natural disasters, and science. Moreover, although prior knowledge of a statement leads people to confirm the statement the next time, they see it (confirmation bias), novelty facilitates decision making since it updates our understanding of the world.4 The fitness value of accurate information seems so obvious, while self-deception seems to threaten such hard-won informational gains. Then, why has not it selected out? The American evolutionary biologist and sociobiologist Robert Trivers5 suggested that although our senses have evolved to give us an exquisitely detailed perception of the outside world, as soon as that information hits our brains, it often becomes biased and distorted, usually without conscious effort. Why should this be so? For Trivers, the evolutionary origins of the human propensity for self-deception lie in the adaptive benefits of deceiving others. An animal becomes a better liar when it believes its own lies, or we deceive ourselves the better to deceive others. Deception in animals is the transmission of misinformation by one animal to another, and natural selection favors deceptive signaling when aggression either confers a great benefit to signalers or imposes a great cost to receivers.6 In humans, self-deception process may have a protective role against depression, while depression on its own may reduce mechanisms of self-deception.7, 8 Humans are biased information-seekers that prefer to receive information that confirms their values and worldviews. Maybe, this is why myths and conspiracy theories around COVID-19 and vaccines exist. We may suggest that underlined neuropsychological processes, probably based on biologically determined self- or other-deceptive mechanisms, may serve in the development, and even the conservation, of at least some of the social behaviors related to the fake news phenomenon. These mechanisms may support the human tendency for biased information-seeking, and even the evolutionary persistence of the fake news phenomenon.9 However, in cases such as of COVID-19 pandemic, the native urge to deceive ourselves and others is not without risk. Beliefs in COVID-19-related conspiracy narratives and fake news are negatively associated with vaccination willingness and infection-preventive behavior.1 The COVID-19 pandemic and associated infodemic have magnified the underlying problem of trust. The vaccine hesitancy is primarily a trust issue rather than an informational problem. Fake news, rumors and conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and vaccines should not be understood only as false beliefs, but also as indicators of popular anxieties and fears. Stress inoculation treatment can help people prepare for subsequent misinformation exposure and to increase misinformation detection.10 Finally, policymakers are advised to build information literacy skills for different levels and environments, and to move away from polarization attitudes and behaviors.</p>","PeriodicalId":20741,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki","volume":" ","pages":"183-186"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22365/jpsych.2022.087","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/7/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

The COVID-19 outbreak has been accompanied by a massive infodemic: an overabundance of information, some accurate and some not. At this pandemic we have seen a large scale of fake news and misinformation, leading to anti-vaccine, anti-mask, and anti-5G protests.1 Fake news is intentionally misleading and deceptive news that is written and published with the intent to damage an entity or a person. They may contain false, misleading, imposter, manipulated or fabricated content. Much of the discourse on fake news conflates three notions, named "information disorders": (a) Misinformation: false information someone shares without knowing it's untrue, (b) Disinformation: false information that's shared with the intention to harm or mislead, and (c) Malinformation: true information that's used to harm others.2 False beliefs generally arise through the same mechanisms that establish accurate beliefs. People appear to encode all new information as if it were true and later tag the information as being either true or false. Different cognitive, social and affective factors lead people to form or endorse misinformed views. The emotional content of the information shared also affects false-belief formation. An angry mood can boost misinformation sharing, while social exclusion, which is likely to induce a negative mood, can increase susceptibility to conspiratorial content.3 As shown by the Illusory Truth Effect, repeated exposure to an article, whether real or fake, increases people's perceptions of its accuracy. In social media, falsehood seems to diffuse significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in all categories of information, and the effects are more pronounced for false political news than for false news about terrorism, natural disasters, and science. Moreover, although prior knowledge of a statement leads people to confirm the statement the next time, they see it (confirmation bias), novelty facilitates decision making since it updates our understanding of the world.4 The fitness value of accurate information seems so obvious, while self-deception seems to threaten such hard-won informational gains. Then, why has not it selected out? The American evolutionary biologist and sociobiologist Robert Trivers5 suggested that although our senses have evolved to give us an exquisitely detailed perception of the outside world, as soon as that information hits our brains, it often becomes biased and distorted, usually without conscious effort. Why should this be so? For Trivers, the evolutionary origins of the human propensity for self-deception lie in the adaptive benefits of deceiving others. An animal becomes a better liar when it believes its own lies, or we deceive ourselves the better to deceive others. Deception in animals is the transmission of misinformation by one animal to another, and natural selection favors deceptive signaling when aggression either confers a great benefit to signalers or imposes a great cost to receivers.6 In humans, self-deception process may have a protective role against depression, while depression on its own may reduce mechanisms of self-deception.7, 8 Humans are biased information-seekers that prefer to receive information that confirms their values and worldviews. Maybe, this is why myths and conspiracy theories around COVID-19 and vaccines exist. We may suggest that underlined neuropsychological processes, probably based on biologically determined self- or other-deceptive mechanisms, may serve in the development, and even the conservation, of at least some of the social behaviors related to the fake news phenomenon. These mechanisms may support the human tendency for biased information-seeking, and even the evolutionary persistence of the fake news phenomenon.9 However, in cases such as of COVID-19 pandemic, the native urge to deceive ourselves and others is not without risk. Beliefs in COVID-19-related conspiracy narratives and fake news are negatively associated with vaccination willingness and infection-preventive behavior.1 The COVID-19 pandemic and associated infodemic have magnified the underlying problem of trust. The vaccine hesitancy is primarily a trust issue rather than an informational problem. Fake news, rumors and conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and vaccines should not be understood only as false beliefs, but also as indicators of popular anxieties and fears. Stress inoculation treatment can help people prepare for subsequent misinformation exposure and to increase misinformation detection.10 Finally, policymakers are advised to build information literacy skills for different levels and environments, and to move away from polarization attitudes and behaviors.

COVID-19时代的假新闻:进化和心理生物学的考虑。
COVID-19疫情伴随着大规模的信息大流行:信息过多,有些准确,有些不准确。在这次疫情中,我们看到了大规模的假新闻和错误信息,导致了反疫苗、反口罩、反5g的抗议活动假新闻是故意误导和欺骗性的新闻,是为了损害一个实体或个人而编写和发布的。它们可能包含虚假、误导、冒名顶替、操纵或捏造的内容。很多关于假新闻的论述都将三个概念混为一谈,称为“信息紊乱”:(a)虚假信息:有人在不知情的情况下分享的虚假信息;(b)虚假信息:分享的虚假信息意图伤害或误导;(c)恶意信息:用来伤害他人的真实信息错误信念通常是通过建立正确信念的相同机制产生的。人们似乎把所有的新信息都当作真实的来编码,然后再把这些信息标记为真实或虚假。不同的认知、社会和情感因素导致人们形成或赞同错误的观点。共享信息的情感内容也会影响错误信念的形成。愤怒的情绪可以促进错误信息的分享,而社会排斥可能会导致消极情绪,从而增加对阴谋论内容的易感性正如虚幻真相效应所显示的那样,反复接触一篇文章,无论是真的还是假的,都会增加人们对其准确性的认知。在社交媒体上,在所有类别的信息中,虚假信息似乎比真相传播得更远、更快、更深、更广泛,虚假政治新闻的影响比关于恐怖主义、自然灾害和科学的虚假新闻更为明显。此外,尽管先前对一个陈述的了解会导致人们在下次看到它时确认它(确认偏差),但新颖性有助于决策,因为它更新了我们对世界的理解准确信息的适应度价值似乎是如此明显,而自我欺骗似乎威胁到来之不易的信息收益。那么,为什么它没有被选中呢?美国进化生物学家和社会生物学家罗伯特·特里弗斯提出,尽管我们的感官已经进化到能让我们对外部世界有细致入微的感知,但一旦这些信息进入我们的大脑,它往往就会变得有偏见和扭曲,通常是无意识的。为什么会这样呢?在特里夫斯看来,人类自欺倾向的进化起源在于欺骗他人的适应性利益。当动物相信自己的谎言时,它就会成为一个更好的说谎者,或者我们欺骗自己是为了更好地欺骗别人。5 .动物的欺骗行为是一种动物向另一种动物传递错误的信息,当攻击行为要么给信号发送者带来巨大的利益,要么给接收者带来巨大的代价时,自然选择倾向于发出欺骗性的信号在人类中,自欺过程可能对抑郁有保护作用,而抑郁本身可能会减少自欺机制。人类是有偏见的信息寻求者,他们更喜欢接受能证实自己价值观和世界观的信息。也许,这就是为什么围绕COVID-19和疫苗存在神话和阴谋论的原因。我们可能认为,被强调的神经心理过程,可能基于生物学上决定的自我或他人欺骗机制,可能在至少一些与假新闻现象相关的社会行为的发展甚至保护中起作用。这些机制可能支持人类有偏见地寻求信息的倾向,甚至支持假新闻现象的进化持久性然而,在COVID-19大流行等情况下,欺骗自己和他人的本能冲动并非没有风险。相信与covid -19相关的阴谋叙述和假新闻与疫苗接种意愿和感染预防行为呈负相关2019冠状病毒病大流行及其相关的信息大流行放大了潜在的信任问题。对疫苗的犹豫主要是信任问题,而不是信息问题。关于新冠肺炎和疫苗的假新闻、谣言和阴谋论不应仅仅被理解为错误的信念,而且还应被理解为公众焦虑和恐惧的指标。应激接种治疗可以帮助人们为随后的错误信息暴露做好准备,并增加错误信息的检测最后,建议决策者针对不同层次和不同环境培养信息素养技能,摒弃两极分化的态度和行为。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki
Psychiatrike = Psychiatriki Medicine-Medicine (all)
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信