Believing misinformation is a “win” for some people, even when proven false

Date:

Share:



Why people endorse misinformation

Our findings highlight the limits of countering misinformation directly, because for some people, literal truth is not the point.

For example, President Donald Trump incorrectly claimed in August 2025 that crime in Washington, DC, was at an all-time high, generating countless fact-checks of his premise and think pieces about his dissociation from reality.

But we believe that to someone with a symbolic mindset, debunkers merely demonstrate that they’re the ones reacting and are therefore weak. The correct information is easily available but is irrelevant to someone who prioritizes a symbolic show of strength. What matters is signaling one isn’t listening and won’t be swayed.

In fact, for symbolic thinkers, nearly any statement should be justifiable. The more outlandish or easily disproved something is, the more powerful one might seem when standing by it. Being an edgelord—a contrarian online provocateur—or outright lying can, in their own odd way, appear “authentic.”

Some people may also view their favorite dissembler’s claims as provocative trolling, but, given the link between this mindset and authoritarianism, they want those far-fetched claims acted on anyway. The deployment of National Guard troops to Washington, for example, can be the desired end goal, even if the offered justification is a transparent farce.

Is this really 5-D chess?

It is possible that symbolic, but not exactly true, beliefs have some downstream benefit, such as serving as negotiation tactics, loyalty tests, or a fake-it-till-you-make-it long game that somehow, eventually, becomes a reality. Political theorist Murray Edelman, known for his work on political symbolism, noted that politicians often prefer scoring symbolic points over delivering results—it’s easier. Leaders can offer symbolism when they have little tangible to provide.

Randy Stein is associate professor of marketing at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona and Abraham Rutchick is professor of psychology at California State University, Northridge.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.



Source link

━ more like this

OpenAI Buys Some Positive News

OpenAI announced Thursday that it had acquired the online business talk show TBPN for an undisclosed sum. The move comes as OpenAI struggles...

OpenAI brings ChatGPT’s Voice mode to CarPlay

In a surprise release, OpenAI has made ChatGPT's Voice mode available through Apple CarPlay. If you're running the latest version of both iOS...

If you love indie games, there’s now a subscription service for these gems

Indie games have always had a discoverability problem. They spike on launch, then quietly disappear into the storefront void. Indie.io, an independent game...

CFTC sues three states for trying to regulate prediction markets

The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission is suing Illinois, Arizona and Connecticut for attempting to outlaw or regulate prediction markets like Kalshi and...

PSA: YouTube will be streaming Coachella for free next week

Coachella officially kicks off next Friday, April 10. But for anyone who doesn’t want to fly out to the desert or fork over...
spot_img