• About
    • About
    • What is Public Interest Communications?
    • Our Team
    • Theories We Use
    • What We’ve Shared
    • Center Updates
    • Programs & Affiliates
      • frank gathering
      • The Research Prize in Public Interest Communications
      • Journal of Public Interest Communications
      • UF Programs
    • Contact Us
  • Our Services
    • Strategy Consulting
    • Issue Research
    • Training – Frameworks and Custom
  • Frameworks & Resources
  • Training
  • Case Studies
Center for Public Interest Communications
Support
  • About
    • About
    • What is Public Interest Communications?
    • Our Team
    • Theories We Use
    • What We’ve Shared
    • Center Updates
    • Programs & Affiliates
      • frank gathering
      • The Research Prize in Public Interest Communications
      • Journal of Public Interest Communications
      • UF Programs
    • Contact Us
  • Our Services
    • Strategy Consulting
    • Issue Research
    • Training – Frameworks and Custom
  • Frameworks & Resources
  • Training
  • Case Studies
  • Research & Insights

Emotions Make Us Blind to Political Lies

  • April 19, 2016
  • 2 minute read
Total
0
Shares
0
0
0
0

Anger and anxiety seem to be driving the polls this election cycle.

As emotions run wild, people are more likely to be grab on to misinformation purported by others in their political party.

In a new study published in the August 2015 Journal of Communication, communications scholar Brian Weeks found that people who feel angry are more likely to believe misinformation.

Over 700 participants were first asked to write an essay about a partisan issue – either immigration reform or the death penalty – which focused on aspects that made them either angry or anxious. Next, they read a fictional Associated Press article containing misinformation about the issue attributed to either Congressional Republicans or Congressional Democrats. Some of the articles debunked the political misinformation, while others just repeated the false claims. Finally, they completed a survey which asked about their emotional state, political leanings and knowledge of current politics.

Participants who felt angry were more likely to believe misinformation that supports the political stance of their party.

On the other hand, anxious people relied less on party cues – whether or not the information is coming from their own party or the other party – when considering misinformation. Rather, they paid more attention to the content of the message itself.

Weeks suggests that anxiety may lead people to question their own party’s stance on the issue and consider information from the other side.

“Although anxiety has typically been discussed as an emotion that facilitates democratic thinking and open-mindedness, this suggests a paradox of anxiety. That is, anxiety promotes critical thinking and learning about politics, but it may backfire if the information considered is inaccurate or misleading,” Weeks explains.

The study suggests that people are misinformed not simply because they pay attention to partisan sources, but that their emotional state also influences how they interpret false information. Weeks points out that “people do not necessarily believe derogatory claims about the other side simply because they are Republican or Democrat. Rather, the combination of anger and partisanship might be what leaves them misinformed.” This is particularly problematic when people are exposed to misinformation, because anger tends to reduce our motivation to seek out new information that challenges our beliefs.

There’s reason to be hopeful, though. “Corrections to misinformation were effective, even in the face of emotional experiences and partisan motivations,” Weeks reports. “Even strong partisan motivated reasoners are willing to give up on their position when exposed to an abundance of information telling them they are wrong.”

Weeks cautions that more research is needed to nail down specifically how emotions and information interact to form opinions. In particular, he notes that whether or not an issue is salient to an audience – whether they’re thinking about the issue – may impact how they process information. Likewise, the misinformation Weeks used in the study wasn’t widely distributed or widely debunked in the media. Long-standing misinformation that has received more media coverage may be more difficult to correct.”

Journal of Communication

0
0
0
Total
0
Shares
Share 0
Tweet 0
Share 0
Related Topics
  • Emotions
  • frankology
  • identity
  • information avoidance
  • journalism
  • messaging
  • politics
Previous Article
  • Research & Insights

How to Talk About Climate Change Science

  • April 12, 2016
View Post
Next Article
  • Research & Insights

Can Facebook Increase Charity?

  • April 21, 2016
View Post
Think we can help with your goals? Read about our services and how we work.
Or reach out today to tell us a bit about your project and inquire how we might help.

 
 

Join our network

We'll send insights and opportunities when you least expect

More of our work
  • Why each side of the partisan divide thinks the other is living in an alternate reality
  • The Science of Belief: Use Values and Worldviews to Build Bridges
  • Communicating the Complexity of Displacement in a Changing Climate
  • How We Are Making Sure The Science We Share Is Good
Latest from the Center
  • Teresa Gonzales and Nicole Bronzan
    Paper exploring local discursive frames of poverty and race wins 2023 research prize
  • Center welcomes two collaborators in research and strategy
  • 2023 Research Prize Finalists
    Center announces three finalists for the $10,000 public interest communications research prize
  • Rakeem Robinson
    Center honors the memory of colleague Rakeem Robinson
How We Help – Case Studies
  • hands with medicine
    Invest in Trust – a vaccine communications guide for CNAs
  • illustration of hand holding United States flag
    Covering immigration in local news—an exploration by Define American
  • gloved hand holding vial
    Science-based communication strategy on COVID for the UN Verified Initiative

Subscribe

Keep up with our latest; request our periodic newsletter.

UF Logo

Center for Public Interest Communications
PO Box 118400
Gainesville, FL 32611-8400

An auxiliary unit of the College of Journalism and Communications

Copyright © 2022

Contact Us

We are eager to chat with you about your project or training need.

Send us a note

The Center for Public Interest Communications, the first of its kind in the nation, is designed to study, test and apply the science of strategic communication for social change. We are based at the University of Florida College of Journalism and Communications.

  • Social Change Communication
  • Science Communication
  • Strategic Communication
  • Broader Impacts
  • Public Interest Communication
  • Narrative Change
  • Leadership Development
  • Strategy Development
  • Effective Presentations
  • Research Translation & Insights

Input your search keywords and press Enter.