To combat misinformation, start with connection, not correction

Misinformation and disinformation can pose a threat to our democracy. It can divide communities. It can be harder for people to make informed choices – at the ballot box, at the grocery store, and at the doctor’s office.

No one is safe. “We simply don’t have the time, cognitive resources, or even motivation to verify literally every piece of information that comes our way,” says Briony Swire-Thompsondirector of the Psychology of Disinformation Lab at Northeastern University.

People trust information more when it comes from sources or cultural contexts they are familiar with, so talking to those close to you can make a difference. The general idea here? Start from a point of connection, not correction.

Here are six ways to combat misinformation.

1. Consider using the term “rumor” or “misleading content” instead of “misinformation”

“(The terms) misinformation and disinformation trigger some sort of reaction, and usually disgust,” says Sarah Nguyễn, a doctoral student at the University of Washington who studies how people share information with each other. become politicized.

Nguyễn leads workshops for the Vietnamese community in the Seattle area on how to deal with problematic information and deepfakes. In workshops, they try to avoid using these terms altogether, opting instead for “rumors” or “misleading content.”

“What people consider misinformation and disinformation can be very different,” says Rachel Kuothe research facilitator of the Asian American Disinformation Table.

2. Take the time to understand why your loved one believes the misleading content

Both Nguyễn and Kuo emphasize the importance of putting aside the idea of intervention to begin with. Recognize that your friend or family member has a lifetime of experiences that affect how they interact with everything they read online or hear on the news. “Very often, people’s memories actually shape how they currently engage with political systems and their media environments,” Kuo says.

Kuo recommends starting the process in a surprising place: by asking them about their family history. Try asking questions about their childhood. What things do they remember? Who were they close to growing up? What do they remember about migrating to the United States, if they did?

From there you can build up to the present day. Kuo says you can then ask questions such as: “What are some of the activities you have engaged in recently?” Did you vote, for example, or were you vaccinated? Why or why not?

You can break off these conversations over time. Alternatively, if the current conversation is going well and you think your loved one would be receptive to the idea of adapting to current events, you can try having the discussion in one go.

3. Talk about your sources and explain why you find them trustworthy

Psychology research examining how to effectively correct misinformation takes place in a highly controlled experimental setting. Swire-Thompson notes that no studies have considered more complex social dynamics, such as family context. That being said, we can still learn from peer-reviewed studies and try to apply them to our conversations with the people we care about.

Swire-Thompson says she has found discussing sources to be an effective way to help debunk misinformation. “Instead of saying ‘here’s the misinformation, it’s false,’ you can say ‘what’s the evidence,’ both to the person believing the misinformation and to your side. » This will help you have a conversation about who or what you both trust and why.

In a studySwire-Thompson found that highlighting a source’s low expertise helped discredit questionable health claims. “It was much more effective than just correcting misinformation,” says Swire-Thompson.

To highlight a source’s lack of qualifications, you can point out their lack of skills, professional training, relevant training, etc. You can also report any conflict of interest she may have.

4. Realize that you are not trying to change anyone’s core beliefs. You are simply addressing information that is not correct

Nguyễn says these conversations aren’t about trying to inherently change someone. “It’s more about how (we can) build that co-existing trust with each other and continue these types of conversations in a sustainable and healthy way.” The goal here is to continue the conversation. Making someone feel like there is something wrong with their worldview will only make them shut down.

Swire-Thompson studied misleading political statements. “For political disinformation, we found that correcting the misinformation didn’t make much difference in terms of trusting that source in the future, or voting for that political candidate. So instead of trying to convince your uncle or aunt not to vote for a particular candidate, try discussing misleading or false information that the candidate or their party has been circulating.

5. When attempting to correct misleading information, provide detailed fact-checking.

You might think it’s best to keep this correction short and sweet, but “providing a good amount of detail about why something is wrong is more effective,” says Swire-Thompson. Research shows It is more effective to offer a “factual alternative” or to say what is actually true than to simply say that information is false.

For example, let’s say your friend expresses concerns about the integrity of mail-in voting. Let’s say they believe, in particular, that fraud is rampant with mail-in ballots. After taking the time to understand why they believe this to be true, you can tell them that cases of voter fraud are extremely rare. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan law and policy institute, several analyzes showed that it is more likely for a person to be struck by lightning than to commit voter fraud. Postal voting also dates back to Civil war and since then, States have developed several levels of security to save the elections.

6. Don’t expect things to change after just one conversation

All three experts say you can’t expect things to change after just one conversation. If things become unproductive or you’re stuck, you can take a step back, Kuo says. “And sometimes if you just don’t agree on a topic, you can (drop it to) preserve the relationship,” Swire-Thompson says.

But if things are going well and it’s a conversation you both feel comfortable with, “repeating the correction is really important, just because of our memory limitations,” says Swire-Thompson.

The researchers discovered a phenomenon called “belief regression.” That’s when a misinformation correction works really well in the short term, “but over time, people’s belief gets closer to those pre-correction levels.”

“Whatever media or information literacy tools exist, it is, like many types of change and development, a slow process,” says Nguyễn. “There’s always this sense of urgency when we hear something true or false and we say ‘wrong, I want to correct you!’ But in the spirit of building long-term relationships, being able to do so on a slower scale will have a greater impact. »

This story was edited by Brett Neely. The visual editor is Beck Harlan.

We would love to hear from you. Email us at [email protected]. Listen to Life Kit on Apple Podcasts And Spotifyor sign up for our newsletter.