Truth Distortion: A Process to Explain Polarization over Unsubstantiated Claims Related to COVID-19

Anne-Sophie Chaxel and Sandra Laporte

Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, 2021, vol. 6, issue 1, 196 - 203

Abstract: Knowing what to believe in the context of COVID-19 is challenging. Conflicting narratives from an array of prominent sources make distinguishing what is true and false difficult. This research examines how a preference for a source of information influences one’s truth judgments about controversial COVID-related statements. An early positive or negative evaluation of a public figure causes individuals to distort their truth judgments in the same direction as their preference. Interestingly, this truth distortion tends to increase linearly with a series of repeated controversial statements. Namely, most people tend to maintain their early preference and increasingly distort their evaluation of truth to make it fit the narrative of the source. Overall, this research provides insights into the process by which polarization occurs; that is, it demonstrates how people come to strongly believe in unsubstantiated claims over time, while others come to strongly reject the same information.

Date: 2021
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/711730 (application/pdf)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/711730 (text/html)
Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.

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:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/711730

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of the Association for Consumer Research from University of Chicago Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Journals Division ().