Debunking misinformation about elections is one of the key tools in the fight to preserve democratic processes, but more and more research shows that these efforts often do not achieve the desired results. Even when authorized institutions, media, or political figures attempt to correct inaccurate information, instead of changing people’s minds, they often further solidify their original beliefs. This is a phenomenon known as the "backfire effect," where individuals are more likely to reject new information if it contradicts their already formed views.

Researchers from MIT and the University of California studied the mechanisms behind these reactions and created a computer model that analyzes various factors influencing the success of debunking election misinformation. Their research indicates that one of the key factors in this process is the level of confidence individuals have in their original beliefs. People who are very confident in their beliefs are much harder to change their minds, even when presented with evidence that contradicts their views. On the other hand, individuals who are less confident in their beliefs are more likely to accept new information and change their minds.

The influence of authority and perception of bias

Another important factor in debunking is the perception of the authority delivering the information. If people believe that the source of information is unbiased and motivated by accuracy, they are more likely to accept that information. For example, when Fox News, a network traditionally aligned with the Republican option, acknowledged Joseph Biden’s victory in Arizona during the 2020 presidential election, it had a significant impact on those who expected a different outcome. Given this perception of impartiality, viewers were more likely to accept the results, even if they initially believed otherwise.

Debunking is more effective when it comes from a source perceived as impartial, and when the authority delivering the information is recognized as motivated by the truth. In a study conducted by MIT scientists, over 200 different scenarios were analyzed in which perceptions of authority bias and confidence in initial beliefs changed. The study showed that in most scenarios, despite efforts to debunk incorrect information, beliefs remained divided. In some cases, that division became even more pronounced.

When does debunking succeed?

Despite these pessimistic findings, the study also showed that there is room for success. Namely, under certain circumstances, people can change their beliefs and accept legitimate information about election outcomes. The key to successful debunking lies in the initial uncertainty of the individual and the perception that the source of information is unbiased and accurate. When people already have doubts about their beliefs, and they recognize the authority delivering the information as impartial, they are more likely to change their views. A notable example is from the 2020 U.S. presidential election, when some Republican governors acknowledged the Democratic victory in their states, despite pressure from their own political circles. Such acknowledgment, coming from political figures typically associated with the opposing side, can have a significant impact on accepting the reality of the election.

Computational models in predicting the success of debunking

To gain a deeper understanding of these processes, researchers used a computer model based on Bayesian inference, which allows for continuous updating of predictions about people’s beliefs as they receive new information. This model treats debunking as an action taken by an individual for their own reasons, and observers then interpret the motives behind those actions. Depending on that interpretation, observers may or may not change their beliefs about the election outcome.

The study does not assume that any beliefs are necessarily incorrect or that any group of people is irrational. Researchers modeled various scenarios in which an authority attempted to debunk a group’s beliefs about the legitimacy of an election result. Each time, researchers altered the levels of confidence in the original beliefs, as well as perceptions of the authority’s motives. In some cases, groups believed that the authority was motivated by accuracy, while in others, they believed the authority was not biased toward a particular stance. The results showed that in most cases, belief polarization remained present, and in some situations, it even grew further.

The importance of independent observers

As new election cycles approach worldwide, including the 2024 U.S. presidential election, non-governmental organizations and independent observers play a crucial role in ensuring the legitimacy of elections. Many organizations train observers to confirm the legitimacy of the election process, which could help strengthen public confidence in the election result. The role of these organizations becomes especially important in politically divided societies, where doubts about the election process are highly pronounced.

To reduce belief polarization and increase election transparency, it is necessary to further strengthen the role of independent observers. They must be recognized as impartial and fully committed to the truth in order to effectively encourage people to accept the real results. The role of these entities is especially important in times of political uncertainty, where doubts about the election process are most pronounced.

The significance of research for future elections

As the U.S. presidential election approaches, the study offers important insights into how the process of debunking misinformation can be improved and societal polarization reduced. The key lies in educating voters, encouraging dialogue, and empowering independent organizations that can verify the accuracy of the election process. Given the growing role of social media in spreading misinformation, it is essential to develop new strategies for recognizing and effectively debunking false information.

In conclusion, while debunking misinformation doesn’t always work as expected, this research offers optimism. Under the right conditions, people can change their opinions and accept facts consistent with real events. Understanding these processes is crucial for future elections, not only in the U.S. but around the world.

Source: Massachusetts Institute of Technology