Misinformation Feels Less Unethical To Share When You’ve Seen It Before

People who repeatedly encounter a fake news item may feel less and less unethical about sharing it on social media, even when they don’t believe the information, a new study suggests. The findings have important implications for policymakers and social media companies trying to curb the spread of misinformation online.

“We suggest that efforts to fight misinformation should consider how people judge the morality of spreading it, not just whether they believe it,”

says co-author Daniel A. Effron.

Repeating Blatant Misinformation

In a series of experiments involving more than 2,500 people, Effron, a London Business School associate professor of organizational behavior, and Medha Raj, a Ph.D. student at the University of Southern California, found that seeing a fake headline just once leads individuals to temper their disapproval of the misinformation when they see it a second, third, or fourth time.

Across five experiments, Effron and Raj asked online survey participants to rate how unethical or acceptable they thought it would be to publish a fake headline, and how likely they would be to “like,” share, and block or unfollow the person who posted it.

As they expected, the researchers found that participants rated headlines they had seen more than once as less unethical to publish than headlines they were shown for the first time.

Participants also said they were more likely to “like” and share a previously seen headline and less likely to block or unfollow the person who posted it. What’s more, they did not rate previously seen headline as significantly more accurate than new ones.

“Thus, our main results cannot be explained by a tendency to misremember false headlines as true,”

the researchers write.

Facts vs. Fiction

Effron and Raj note that efforts to curtail misinformation typically focus on helping people distinguish fact from fiction. Facebook, for example, has tried informing users when they try to share news that fact-checkers have flagged as false.

But such strategies may fail if users feel more comfortable sharing misinformation they know is fake when they have seen it before.

The researchers theorize that repeating misinformation lends it a ring of truthfulness that can increase people’s tendency to give it a moral pass, regardless of whether they believe it. Merely imagining misinformation as if it were true can have a similar effect.

Effron’s earlier research shows that people are more likely to excuse a blatant falsehood after imagining how it could have been true if the past had been different.

“The results should be of interest to citizens of contemporary democracies. Misinformation can stoke political polarization and undermine democracy, so it is important for people to understand when and why it spreads,”

Effron adds.

[1] Effron, D. A., & Raj, M. (2019). Misinformation and Morality: Encountering Fake-News Headlines Makes Them Seem Less Unethical to Publish and Share. Psychological Science. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797619887896

Like This Article? Sciencebeta has a free 3 times weekly digest of the most interesting and intriguing articles in psychology, neuroscience, neurology, and cognitive sciences. Want to give it a try? Subscribe right here