Susceptible to Misinformation: Why Do We Believe What We Believe?

What are some reasons we believe things that may or may not be true? Why is it that misinformation about vaccines is flourishing? Nurses COVID Article

It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble it’s what you know for sure that just ain't so - Humorist Josh Billings

Information and Misinformation are Circulated at a Very Fast Pace

How do we decide what to believe and what not to believe? And once we form an opinion, how likely is it that we’ll change our minds?

We’re all subject to emotionally based reasoning, biases and faulty reasoning. When we make a decision, such as whether or not to vaccinate, we evaluate a barrage of information through our individual filters.  

Misinformation Manipulates

There's a great cost to misinformation- a cost to society and therefore a cost to each of us. Manipulation amplifies our fears and stories that intentionally provoke an emotional response make misinformation hard to correct. Misinformation creates doubt and suspicion. 'What if it does change my genes/cause infertility/cause cancer?’

Fred lives in a small town in a mountain area, drives 50 miles every day to work in a hospital, and is choosing not to get vaccinated. He attends a local  church of like-minded people who believe serious effects and deaths of healthcare workers caused by the vaccine are being concealed as part of a larger vaccine-injury cover-up. They believe everyone is being fooled by mainstream media except for themselves and others who share their beliefs. They see themselves as a brave minority, almost counter-culture heroes, standing up for truth and right.

Fred and his friends have lots of “facts”, stories, and examples to maintain their beliefs. 

Recently several members of the church contracted COVID after an indoor concert but vaccinations have not increased. 

Conspiracy Theories

Headlines containing the words “cover-up” grab interest and appeal to the conspiracy theorist in all of us. The most compelling stories evoke fear and outrage. These stories have always been with us and have enduring appeal. Who has not heard that the government is hiding info about aliens, using aborted fetuses, stealing human organs, and lying about foreign policy?  

Conspiracists believe they possess secret important knowledge about world events unknown to others, even experts. People who believe in one conspiracy are more likely to believe in multiple conspiracies.

Conspiracies are hard to combat. Even providing factual information does not dispel conspiracy beliefs. The person presenting facts may be seen as in on the conspiracy. The conspiracist simply digs in and strengthens their convictions. 

Confirmation Bias and Selective Exposure

Our worldviews affect what we are likely to believe and what we are likely to reject. There’s a tendency to give greater credence to information that aligns with our beliefs and to ignore information that doesn't fit with our beliefs, say, around civil liberties and social responsibilities.

Selective exposure allows us to:

  • avoid information contrary to what we believe
  • perceive information selectively
  • forget information we disagree with (selective retention)

Religious Misinformation

Religious misinformation is propagated by influential religious leaders sharing false rumors and even lies. Some of this misinformation worldwide is tragic, such as urging parents not to vaccinate their children against polio. These leaders have influence, a ready platform, and cultural competence with their followers, often using strategically-chosen, emotive language. Some people will believe a religious leader over a healthcare professional. They adhere to a type of groupthink, which promotes loyalty, cohesion, and harmony of the group over individual disagreement.

Identifiable Victim Bias

Anecdotes and stories that cause emotional arousal spread faster and are “sticky”. We connect with stories we can relate to, like a nurse who fainted after receiving a shot, or an anti-vaxxer radio personality who died from COVID. We’re more likely to respond strongly to a single, personable example than to broad statistics. 

Faulty Reasoning

Let’s say a 56 yr old doctor in Florida dies 2 weeks after getting the vaccine. This may be used by some to confirm that vaccines are dangerous, even if there’s no causal relationship. Headlines may spin the story either way, for example, “Doctor dies from vaccine” which is more causal than  “Doctor dies after receiving vaccine” (still implied).

Risk Perception 

People can underestimate or overestimate their risk.

Vaccine skeptics believe they won’t get sick, that COVID is “just the flu” and the risk of getting the vaccine is greater than the risk of getting COVID. Over-estimaters may mask while walking alone outside.

Misinformation Superspreaders

Social media is perfect for spreading fake news . A small group called the “dirty dozen” are labelled superspreaders by the Center for Countering Digital Hate.

They’re said to spread 65% of misinformation, lies, and propaganda about vaccines.

Some are motivated by profit, and some include disgraced doctors. Many have innocuous sounding names, such as “Physicians for Informed Consent” and “Freedom Angels”, deliberately leaving the word “vaccine” out of their names so as not to flag social media rules.

Strategies for Evaluating News

FACT: Be well read and read from a variety of sources. Foster a healthy skepticism, a critical eye, and actively question what you see. Click on the sources and follow to the end. If you’re unsure if it’s valid, then don’t share it.

FACT: Be aware of cognitive fluency, which is when we tend to read articles that are considered cognitively easy-to-read, including even spending more time on an article with a pleasing font.

FACT: Read more than the headlines, and don’t share just because one sentence or a headline is attention-grabbing or clever. Watch out for overly emotional language, excessive explanation points, misspellings, tabloid style, and sensationalism.

FACT: Don’t be fooled by look-alike sources- for example, Abcnews.com is not really the URL for ABC news but it looks official and sounds like legitimate a news site.

FACT: Think before you share. Hold people you hear news from accountable. Let's all ask each other “What is your source?” Fact-check at Snopes.com, Factcheck.org, and other fact check sites.

How do you recognize fake news, and what biases are you aware of?

You will almost universally find that the people who believe these conspiracies and double down, are not very well educated, which generates an insecurity complex, which creates the accompanying emotions, that can only be relieved by hearing similar views, to substantiate and bolster the insecurity complex. 

They are people who are unable to accept criticism of any kind because of emotional issues created by lacking the interlectual ability to process or never having the role models or opportunities to learn how to appropriately deal with the inadequacy. So they either lash out irrationally or suppress the feelings, further increasing their anger and seeking out their kind for solace and commraderie. 

Just like an addict seeks out his fixes, so to does inadequate people! And here's the kicker, the conspiracy theories doesn't just extend to one area of their lives, it's a perspective that encompasses ALL AREAS of their lives! And they are so easy to spot! Their conversation subjects, their viewing material, entertainment choices, habits, friends, food choices etc etc. 

It's the reason that laws are necessary! To control people who want the benefits of a society but not accept the rules that make that society functional! 

Rights do not extend to everyone in the same way! And the law which has become a mass produced institution, doesn't have the ability to address the individual situations. Unless you have money! 

The solution is educational as so easily evidenced by most Northern Europeans. Even their criminals seem to have a more insightful perspective. 

 

This was good advice from Psychology Today

In the "old days," people sought information from books, print newspapers, major network TV news, and experts. That has shifted dramatically since the internet, where most of us now seek out information online where there are many, many more sources of information than ever before. One result has been that expertise is now devalued and knowledge has been democratized.

Ridicule and argument don’t appear to be effective strategies if you’re trying to change hearts and minds. At their core, conspiracy beliefs are often rooted in lack of trust in institutions. So, when conspiracy theories are related to science like with flat-earthers or anti-vaxxers, it means that science educators have to revamp our efforts, being mindful of what works and what doesn’t.

Empathic listening is usually the best place to start. The greatest potential lies in reaching out to the “dilettantes looking for answers," such as flat earthers or anti-vaxxers who are trying to resolve the disparities between mainstream scientific knowledge and what they’re seeing on Youtube.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
7 hours ago, RKM2021 said:

The greatest potential lies in reaching out to the “dilettantes looking for answers," such as flat earthers or anti-vaxxers who are trying to resolve the disparities between mainstream scientific knowledge and what they’re seeing on Youtube.

Most of them aren't reaching out looking for answers.  Most of them come to AN spreading unfounded fears and social media rationale to remain unvaccinated with arrogant claims and statements about not vaccinating or freedom of speech or silenced voices or some other crap that only serves to reduce vaccine acceptance. 

In response, some reply by providing information and data.  That is information and data is almost always dismissed and the opinion of a random person is offered in rebuttal by the new member.  These new members aren't here looking for information to inform themselves and that is apparent from their posting style.  They are here to make it seem like it's normal and reasonable to be fearful about the vaccines or that it is reasonable to think there might be an untoward effect from these vaccines years from now.

Some simply counter every antivaccination claim and comment that is published in this public forum representing nursing professional discussion.  Most nurses understand the science and are vaccinated.  It's important that this discussion board not become associated with nurses who set aside sound science for some other feelings or beliefs. 

 

1 Votes
Specializes in Travel Nurse, All ICU specialties and ED.
On 9/20/2021 at 11:04 AM, toomuchbaloney said:

Most of them aren't reaching out looking for answers.  Most of them come to AN spreading unfounded fears and social media rationale to remain unvaccinated with arrogant claims and statements about not vaccinating or freedom of speech or silenced voices or some other crap that only serves to reduce vaccine acceptance. 

I have had trouble understanding the victim card the posters you're talking about consistently play. They claim to want "open professional dialogue" but when someone doesn't agree with them and provides a matter of fact explanation why, they then call them a "bully" or "elitist". Most of the behavior I have witnessed is these posters only replying to questions they can answer with the same rhetoric over and over and ignoring any newly posed questions... even when asked directly to them. LOL  

On 9/20/2021 at 3:11 AM, RKM2021 said:

This was good advice from Psychology Today

In the "old days," people sought information from books, print newspapers, major network TV news, and experts. That has shifted dramatically since the internet, where most of us now seek out information online where there are many, many more sources of information than ever before. One result has been that expertise is now devalued and knowledge has been democratized.

Ridicule and argument don’t appear to be effective strategies if you’re trying to change hearts and minds. At their core, conspiracy beliefs are often rooted in lack of trust in institutions. So, when conspiracy theories are related to science like with flat-earthers or anti-vaxxers, it means that science educators have to revamp our efforts, being mindful of what works and what doesn’t.

Empathic listening is usually the best place to start. The greatest potential lies in reaching out to the “dilettantes looking for answers," such as flat earthers or anti-vaxxers who are trying to resolve the disparities between mainstream scientific knowledge and what they’re seeing on Youtube.

Disagree! 

Most of the anti vaxxers, maskers etc are generally idiots by nature. That doesn't mean that they are not nice people just that they are not very bright to begin with. 

Begin with, their ability to objectively judge people. You will frequently find that they like trump, Ted Cruz, Insurrectionists types etc. Why, does such pathological people resonate with them, when to any normal person, such people should engage an immediate alert response because of how they behave and what they say? Now contrast that with someone as measured as Dr Fauci with his firstly, qualifications, then demeanor and delivery and so obvious educated content! Yet to them, HE, engages their alert response. Paradoxical? No pathology! 

When you can't differentiate from conmen and charlatans to measured, educated, composed people, it says a lot about you and how dangerous you will be in the future, re decisions and adjustability. 

What type of people are drawn to heroin and cocaine and meth etc? Do they make good potential partners? Now how about trumpistas and extremist religious etc? DO YOU really think that the judgementalness will not eventually be turned in your direction?