The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings

Gordon Pennycook (), Adam Bear (), Evan T. Collins () and David G. Rand ()
Additional contact information
Gordon Pennycook: Hill and Levene Schools of Business, University of Regina, Regina, Saskatchewan S4S 0A2, Canada;
Adam Bear: Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138;
Evan T. Collins: School of Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06510;
David G. Rand: Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142; Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; Institute for Data, Systems, and Society, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139

Management Science, 2020, vol. 66, issue 11, 4944-4957

Abstract: What can be done to combat political misinformation? One prominent intervention involves attaching warnings to headlines of news stories that have been disputed by third-party fact-checkers. Here we demonstrate a hitherto unappreciated potential consequence of such a warning: an implied truth effect , whereby false headlines that fail to get tagged are considered validated and thus are seen as more accurate. With a formal model, we demonstrate that Bayesian belief updating can lead to such an implied truth effect. In Study 1 ( n = 5,271 MTurkers), we find that although warnings do lead to a modest reduction in perceived accuracy of false headlines relative to a control condition (particularly for politically concordant headlines), we also observed the hypothesized implied truth effect: the presence of warnings caused untagged headlines to be seen as more accurate than in the control. In Study 2 ( n = 1,568 MTurkers), we find the same effects in the context of decisions about which headlines to consider sharing on social media. We also find that attaching verifications to some true headlines—which removes the ambiguity about whether untagged headlines have not been checked or have been verified—eliminates, and in fact slightly reverses, the implied truth effect. Together these results contest theories of motivated reasoning while identifying a potential challenge for the policy of using warning tags to fight misinformation—a challenge that is particularly concerning given that it is much easier to produce misinformation than it is to debunk it.

Keywords: fake news; news media; social media; fact-checking; misinformation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (38)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2019.3478 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:66:y:2020:i:11:p:4944-4957

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Management Science from INFORMS Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Asher ().