Taking fact-checks literally but not seriously? The effects of journalistic fact-checking on factual beliefs and candidate favorability
Taking fact-checks literally but not seriously? The effects of journalistic fact-checking on factual beliefs and candidate favorability
Are citizens willing to accept journalistic fact-checks of misleading claims from candidates they support and to update their attitudes about those candidates? Previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions about the effects of exposure to counter-attitudinal information. As fact-checking has become more prominent, it is therefore worth examining how respondents respond to fact-checks of politicians—a question with important implications for understanding the effects of this journalistic format on elections. We present results to two experiments conducted during the 2016 campaign that test the effects of exposure to realistic journalistic fact-checks of claims made by Donald Trump during his convention speech and a general election debate. These messages improved the accuracy of respondents’ factual beliefs, even among his supporters, but had no measurable effect on attitudes toward Trump. These results suggest that journalistic fact-checks can reduce misperceptions but often have minimal effects on candidate evaluations or vote choice.
939-960
Nyhan, Brendan
76e1ec80-0af5-432d-9dd6-f7e8237191e4
Porter, Ethan
8095d6f9-06f6-4458-9402-1bbab6bf317c
Reifler, Jason
426301a1-f90b-470d-a076-04a9d716c491
Wood, Thomas J.
a50d4141-d95b-4d4d-a1b3-231f658dc350
21 January 2019
Nyhan, Brendan
76e1ec80-0af5-432d-9dd6-f7e8237191e4
Porter, Ethan
8095d6f9-06f6-4458-9402-1bbab6bf317c
Reifler, Jason
426301a1-f90b-470d-a076-04a9d716c491
Wood, Thomas J.
a50d4141-d95b-4d4d-a1b3-231f658dc350
Nyhan, Brendan, Porter, Ethan, Reifler, Jason and Wood, Thomas J.
(2019)
Taking fact-checks literally but not seriously? The effects of journalistic fact-checking on factual beliefs and candidate favorability.
Political Behavior, 42, .
(doi:10.1007/s11109-019-09528-x).
Abstract
Are citizens willing to accept journalistic fact-checks of misleading claims from candidates they support and to update their attitudes about those candidates? Previous studies have reached conflicting conclusions about the effects of exposure to counter-attitudinal information. As fact-checking has become more prominent, it is therefore worth examining how respondents respond to fact-checks of politicians—a question with important implications for understanding the effects of this journalistic format on elections. We present results to two experiments conducted during the 2016 campaign that test the effects of exposure to realistic journalistic fact-checks of claims made by Donald Trump during his convention speech and a general election debate. These messages improved the accuracy of respondents’ factual beliefs, even among his supporters, but had no measurable effect on attitudes toward Trump. These results suggest that journalistic fact-checks can reduce misperceptions but often have minimal effects on candidate evaluations or vote choice.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
e-pub ahead of print date: 21 January 2019
Published date: 21 January 2019
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 497059
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/497059
ISSN: 0190-9320
PURE UUID: 17d1dd5c-5d4f-46c6-a981-09e70ebfdc06
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 10 Jan 2025 17:52
Last modified: 21 Jan 2025 03:15
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Brendan Nyhan
Author:
Ethan Porter
Author:
Jason Reifler
Author:
Thomas J. Wood
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics