Do Claims about Disinformation Decrease Belief in Factual Information?

• In Event: Misinformation, Doubt, and Distrust

Abstract

The spread of disinformation has been described by public officials, the media, and communications scholars as a threat to political order, stability, and even democracy itself. One underappreciated effect of this heightened awareness is that partisan or profit-seeking actors may strategically invoke disinformation to raise doubts about, or distract from, politically or financially damaging information. This paper analyzes the effects of the “disinformation discourse” by assessing the extent to which claims about disinformation can lead people to doubt factual information. We ask three related questions. How does the identity of an actor accused of spreading disinformation affect people’s willingness to believe a disinformation claim? How do the identities of actors framing claims about disinformation affect people’s willingness to believe a disinformation claim? Does exposure to claims about disinformation claims lead to reduced trust in democratic institutions or confidence in people’s ability to acquire accurate information?

To answer these questions, we conducted original survey experiments in two politically divided countries that have been subject to both domestic and foreign disinformation: the US (n=3,400) and Taiwan (n=2,600). In order to assess how people respond to claims of disinformation, we randomly vary the identities of the claimant and the supposed disinforming actor. To ascertain the range of situations in which such claims resonate, we include statements that are true, false, and hypothetical. Our results indicate, first, in both countries, claims of disinformation have significant negative effects on belief. Second, claims made by co-partisans are unsurprisingly deemed more believable but those made by ostensibly neutral actors vary by the partisanship of the respondent. Third, in both the US and Taiwan, Russia and China are perceived as equally likely to spread disinformation and are perceived as greater threats than domestic political operatives. This paper stakes out new ground in the study of propaganda. We show how the disinformation discourse, coupled with polarized politics, provides cynical actors with a powerful tool to obfuscate facts. These findings point to a downside to the otherwise justified efforts of policy makers, scholars, and media to highlight the threat of disinformation.

Authors

• Scott B. Radnitz, University of Washington

• Yuan Hsiao, University of Washington