Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37998643›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Breaking (Fake) News: No Personal Relevance Effect on Misinformation Vulnerability.

Francesco Ceccarini, Pasquale Capuozzo, Ilaria Colpizzi, Corrado Caudek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Francesco CeccariniDepartment of Science, New York University Abu Dhabi, Abu Dhabi 129188, United Arab Emirates.
Pasquale CapuozzoIRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, 16147 Genoa, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-3035-8487
Ilaria ColpizziNeurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy.
Corrado CaudekNeurosciences, Psychology, Drug Research and Child Health (NEUROFARBA), University of Florence, 50139 Florence, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-1404-0420

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The massive spread of fake news (FN) requires a better understanding of both risks and protective psychological factors underlying vulnerability to misinformation. Prior studies have mostly dealt with news that do not bear any direct personal relevance to participants. Here, we ask whether high-stakes news topics may decrease vulnerability to FN. Data were collected during the national lockdown in Italy (COVID-19 news) and one year later (political news). We compared truth discrimination and overall belief for true news (TN) and FN concerning COVID-19 and political topics. Our findings indicate that psychological risk and protective factors have similar effects on truth discrimination, regardless of whether the news topic is highly or minimally personally relevant. However, we found different effects of psychological factors on overall belief, for high and low personal relevance. These results suggest that, given a high level of cognitive dissonance, individuals tend to rely on proximal or emotional sources of information. In summary, our study underscores the importance of understanding the psychological factors that contribute to vulnerability to misinformation, particularly in high-stakes news contexts.

Indexed as

COVID-19fake newsmisinformationsocial mediavulnerability factors

Identifiers

PMID37998643
PMCPMC10669344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.