Trump won the 2020 election. Michelle Obama is a man. FEMA is insolvent because they gave all their funding to illegal immigrants. All of these declarations are easy to recognize as fallacious. Or are they? Could they be true? Misinformation is easy for most people to disregard unless it is directed at us by a sincerely deceived coworker, friend or loved one who feels obligated to convert you.
Even though such beliefs come with consequences, from social rejection to increased feelings of anxiety, Rob Brotherton, a psychologist, and author of two books on fake news reminds us that it’s human and normal to believe misinformation. “It’s a defense mechanism: we’re primed to be suspicious and afraid of things that can’t be explained.”
Many people are exquisitely susceptible to spine-tingling news that is manipulated to be emotionally charged, particu- larly if it threatens their status, or is frequently and forcefully repeated. Reports from our own in-group, even if that consists of friends we’ve never met but strongly identify with, are more eagerly accepted and shared, particularly if it “proves” what we fervently want to be true.
Psychologist Jovan Byford is a lecturer at Open University in the United Kingdom. He teaches that conspiracy theories provoke strong emotional protection for believers. “They are not just about right and wrong,” he says, “but under- pinned by feelings of resentment, anger and indignation over how the world works.” Since our convictions are inherently bound up in our self-image, it can be painful and frightening to poke at them. Conspiracy theories and the embrace of propaganda allow devotees a sense of superiority.
They feel they have significant “inside information” that supports their self-esteem, especially if they “do their own research.”
Instead of being annoyed or alarmed, experts suggest starting from an empathetic point of connection, not correction. Resist the urgency to remedy their confusion and inspire a realization of the “truth.” Instead, use the existing shared trust with our conversational partner, along with gentle questioning (Where did you hear/read/see that? What evidence was presented? Does it seem authentic?”) affords the opportunity to examine the notion together by considering the source of information, the motives behind it, and what other informants say about it. This promotes discussion of what you both believe and why. Exposing a faulty source’s lack of expertise or their questionable motives for spreading their distortions can help expose the purpose of their message.
