Fact Checking Websites Can Backfire

It seems incontrovertible to some of us that tens of millions of people in the US and UK have fallen for hoaxes. (That does not, by the way, tell you what my politics are. You might be surprised.) People on both sides of issues are convinced that the people who disagree with them have bought into spoofs of the news and don't have the first clue about what is a critical thinker. But education efforts often don't work.

Take the example of the ongoing controversy about vaccinations and autism. Pro-vaccinators ignore the fact that about 50 years ago, in a single country, with a single vaccine that contained a single preservative that nowadays has been almost completely continued, there was a surge in cases of autism. Anti-vaxxers may buy into the idea that all vaccines are awful and it's safer for children to go vaccine-free.

When anti-anti-vaxxers set up a myth buster website to demonstrate why the MMR safe, however, they succeeded in both informing their target audience and reducing the rate of vaccination. The pro-vaccine site posted pictures of children who had suffered horrible disabilities (neurological problems, blindness, etc.) as a result of getting measles. However, the sight of suffering children carried over to the decision about taking the vaccine. People who saw the results of not getting vaccinated were less likely to have their children vaccinated, not more.

So how can anyone possibly overcome human nature to persuade people to accept information that is critical to making decisions that are critical for the human race? It's not easy, but here are some suggestions:

• Respect the difference between information graphics and graphic information. Short, snappy, visual presentations of objective, numerical information increase acceptance of ideas. Emotive, heart-breaking, pathetic, graphic photographs, on the other hand, reduce it.
• Make appeals to self-esteem to increase acceptance of information. If a misconception is tied in with self-esteem, it can be hard to overcome. The idea that you are only a person of worth because of your skin color, or your religion, or your sexual orientation, usually expressed as "at least I'm not (fill in the blank)," makes it harder to overcome erroneous beliefs about race, religion, and/or sex. Moral judgments are usually led by example. Factual judgments, however, can be facilitated by appealing to the obvious good qualities of the person you want to persuade. However,

READ What Makes People Fall For Conspiracy Theories?

• Keep in mind that conspiracy theories are more likely to be accepted by conservatives and less likely to be accepted by liberals when pitched with an appeal to self-esteem. "Everybody knows that" works with conservatives but not with liberals (which isn't to say whether one side or the other actually knows anything). It also helps to keep in mind that
• Curious people are more likely to consider views that clash with their "tribe." In general, however, the less political you make an issue, the more likely you are to persuade people to go along with you. A majority of American farmers, for instance, vote for the political party that rejects climate change, and they reject climate change. However, a majority of American farmers also respond to surveys that they believe that climate change will run them about of business. Taking an issue out of its political context changes response.

People believe conspiracy theories to make understanding easier. It's the losing side of a political battle that needs relief from cognitive dissonance. Now that the political dynamics of the United States has changed, expect conspiracy theories to be a lot more popular with the side that lost the elections, most recently, than the side that won.