Michael C Schwalbe, Katie Joseff, Samuel Woolley, Geoffrey L Cohen
{"title":"当政治战胜真相:政治一致性与真实性是决定新闻的相信、分享和回忆的因素。","authors":"Michael C Schwalbe, Katie Joseff, Samuel Woolley, Geoffrey L Cohen","doi":"10.1037/xge0001650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Resistance to truth and susceptibility to falsehood threaten democracies around the globe. The present research assesses the magnitude, manifestations, and predictors of these phenomena, while addressing methodological concerns in past research. We conducted a preregistered study with a split-sample design (discovery sample N = 630, validation sample N = 1,100) of U.S. Census-matched online adults. Proponents and opponents of 2020 U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump were presented with fake and real political headlines ahead of the election. The political concordance of the headlines determined participants' belief in and intention to share news more than the truth of the headlines. This \"concordance-over-truth\" bias persisted across education levels, analytic reasoning ability, and partisan groups, with some evidence of a stronger effect among Trump supporters. Resistance to true news was stronger than susceptibility to fake news. The most robust predictors of the bias were participants' belief in the relative objectivity of their political side, extreme views about Trump, and the extent of their one-sided media consumption. Interestingly, participants stronger in analytic reasoning, measured with the Cognitive Reflection Task, were more accurate in discerning real from fake headlines when accurate conclusions aligned with their ideology. Finally, participants remembered fake headlines more than real ones regardless of the political concordance of the news story. Discussion explores why the concordance-over-truth bias observed in our study is more pronounced than previous research suggests, and examines its causes, consequences, and potential remedies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":15698,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","volume":"153 10","pages":"2524-2551"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"When politics trumps truth: Political concordance versus veracity as a determinant of believing, sharing, and recalling the news.\",\"authors\":\"Michael C Schwalbe, Katie Joseff, Samuel Woolley, Geoffrey L Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/xge0001650\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Resistance to truth and susceptibility to falsehood threaten democracies around the globe. The present research assesses the magnitude, manifestations, and predictors of these phenomena, while addressing methodological concerns in past research. We conducted a preregistered study with a split-sample design (discovery sample N = 630, validation sample N = 1,100) of U.S. Census-matched online adults. Proponents and opponents of 2020 U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump were presented with fake and real political headlines ahead of the election. The political concordance of the headlines determined participants' belief in and intention to share news more than the truth of the headlines. This \\\"concordance-over-truth\\\" bias persisted across education levels, analytic reasoning ability, and partisan groups, with some evidence of a stronger effect among Trump supporters. Resistance to true news was stronger than susceptibility to fake news. The most robust predictors of the bias were participants' belief in the relative objectivity of their political side, extreme views about Trump, and the extent of their one-sided media consumption. Interestingly, participants stronger in analytic reasoning, measured with the Cognitive Reflection Task, were more accurate in discerning real from fake headlines when accurate conclusions aligned with their ideology. Finally, participants remembered fake headlines more than real ones regardless of the political concordance of the news story. Discussion explores why the concordance-over-truth bias observed in our study is more pronounced than previous research suggests, and examines its causes, consequences, and potential remedies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"volume\":\"153 10\",\"pages\":\"2524-2551\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001650\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology: General","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0001650","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
对真相的抵制和对谬误的易感性威胁着全球的民主国家。本研究评估了这些现象的严重程度、表现形式和预测因素,同时解决了以往研究中的方法问题。我们对与美国人口普查相匹配的在线成年人进行了一项预先登记的研究,研究采用了分离样本设计(发现样本 N = 630,验证样本 N = 1100)。在大选之前,我们向 2020 年美国总统候选人唐纳德-特朗普的支持者和反对者展示了虚假和真实的政治标题。标题的政治一致性比标题的真实性更能决定参与者对新闻的信念和分享新闻的意愿。这种 "一致大于真实 "的偏差在不同教育水平、分析推理能力和党派群体中持续存在,有证据表明在特朗普的支持者中影响更大。对真实新闻的抵制强于对假新闻的易感性。对偏见最有力的预测因素是参与者对其政治立场相对客观性的信念、对特朗普的极端观点以及其片面的媒体消费程度。有趣的是,以认知反思任务(Cognitive Reflection Task)衡量的分析推理能力较强的参与者,在得出与其意识形态一致的准确结论时,能更准确地辨别真假标题。最后,无论新闻故事的政治观点是否一致,参与者对虚假标题的记忆都比对真实标题的记忆深刻。讨论探讨了为什么在我们的研究中观察到的 "一致大于真实 "的偏差比之前的研究表明的更为明显,并研究了其原因、后果和潜在的补救措施。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)。
When politics trumps truth: Political concordance versus veracity as a determinant of believing, sharing, and recalling the news.
Resistance to truth and susceptibility to falsehood threaten democracies around the globe. The present research assesses the magnitude, manifestations, and predictors of these phenomena, while addressing methodological concerns in past research. We conducted a preregistered study with a split-sample design (discovery sample N = 630, validation sample N = 1,100) of U.S. Census-matched online adults. Proponents and opponents of 2020 U.S. presidential candidate Donald Trump were presented with fake and real political headlines ahead of the election. The political concordance of the headlines determined participants' belief in and intention to share news more than the truth of the headlines. This "concordance-over-truth" bias persisted across education levels, analytic reasoning ability, and partisan groups, with some evidence of a stronger effect among Trump supporters. Resistance to true news was stronger than susceptibility to fake news. The most robust predictors of the bias were participants' belief in the relative objectivity of their political side, extreme views about Trump, and the extent of their one-sided media consumption. Interestingly, participants stronger in analytic reasoning, measured with the Cognitive Reflection Task, were more accurate in discerning real from fake headlines when accurate conclusions aligned with their ideology. Finally, participants remembered fake headlines more than real ones regardless of the political concordance of the news story. Discussion explores why the concordance-over-truth bias observed in our study is more pronounced than previous research suggests, and examines its causes, consequences, and potential remedies. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Experimental Psychology: General publishes articles describing empirical work that bridges the traditional interests of two or more communities of psychology. The work may touch on issues dealt with in JEP: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, JEP: Human Perception and Performance, JEP: Animal Behavior Processes, or JEP: Applied, but may also concern issues in other subdisciplines of psychology, including social processes, developmental processes, psychopathology, neuroscience, or computational modeling. Articles in JEP: General may be longer than the usual journal publication if necessary, but shorter articles that bridge subdisciplines will also be considered.