Has anyone yet heard any leftist acknowledge that the Clinton campaign paid for a phony dossier, and that senior administration officials represented to a court that it was a neutral information source, in order to spy on the opposition? A good measure of fidelity to the truth.
@jmblaw01…really? You really want to continue to spread obvious lies like that? Where is your conscience? Do you have one? Normalization of such idiotic stuff is corrosive, you know. It has terribly corroded your judgement, and is working it’s evil way into the body poliitc.
Rumors and Health Care Reform: Experiments in Political Misinformation
This article explores belief in political rumors surrounding the health care reforms enacted by Congress in 2010. Refuting rumors with statements from unlikely sources can, under certain circumstances, increase the willingness of citizens to reject rumors regardless of their own political predilections. Such source credibility effects, while well known in the political persuasion literature, have not been applied to the study of rumor. Though source credibility appears to be an effective tool for debunking political rumors, risks remain. Drawing upon research from psychology on ‘fluency’ – the ease of information recall – this article argues that rumors acquire power through familiarity. Attempting to quash rumors through direct refutation may facilitate their diffusion by increasing fluency. The empirical results find that merely repeating a rumor increases its power.
B.J.Pol.S. 47, 241–262, 2015doi:10.1017/S0007123415000186First published online 19 June 2015
Though fact-checking’s prominence has grown in recent years, little is known about public attitudes toward the format or how exposure to it affects the accuracy of people’s beliefs about controversial political issues. Fact-check readers appear to be better informed than we might otherwise expect, but this inference is limited by the fact that individuals self-select into fact-checking exposure. During the 2014 campaign, we therefore randomly exposed a representative panel of Americans to receive factchecking or placebo content over multiple survey waves. Our findings indicate that fact-checking exposure significantly increases the accuracy of people’s beliefs about contested political claims, especially among individuals with high political knowledge. Notably, we find only limited evidence that these effects vary by whether the fact-check is politically congenial to respondents. Our data also indicates that educated and politically sophisticated people are more interested in fact-checking andthat Republicans feel less positively about the practice than Democrats.
Darsan54 Premium Member about 6 years ago
“Truth” tends to be in the eye of the beholder. Ask Pontius Pilate.
braindead Premium Member about 6 years ago
Trump Disciples will not understand this comic.
jbmlaw01 about 6 years ago
Has anyone yet heard any leftist acknowledge that the Clinton campaign paid for a phony dossier, and that senior administration officials represented to a court that it was a neutral information source, in order to spy on the opposition? A good measure of fidelity to the truth.
twclix about 6 years ago
@jmblaw01…really? You really want to continue to spread obvious lies like that? Where is your conscience? Do you have one? Normalization of such idiotic stuff is corrosive, you know. It has terribly corroded your judgement, and is working it’s evil way into the body poliitc.
martens about 6 years ago
Rumors and Health Care Reform: Experiments in Political Misinformation
This article explores belief in political rumors surrounding the health care reforms enacted by Congress in 2010. Refuting rumors with statements from unlikely sources can, under certain circumstances, increase the willingness of citizens to reject rumors regardless of their own political predilections. Such source credibility effects, while well known in the political persuasion literature, have not been applied to the study of rumor. Though source credibility appears to be an effective tool for debunking political rumors, risks remain. Drawing upon research from psychology on ‘fluency’ – the ease of information recall – this article argues that rumors acquire power through familiarity. Attempting to quash rumors through direct refutation may facilitate their diffusion by increasing fluency. The empirical results find that merely repeating a rumor increases its power.
B.J.Pol.S. 47, 241–262, 2015doi:10.1017/S0007123415000186First published online 19 June 2015
martens about 6 years ago
But:Do People Actually Learn From Fact-Checking?
Though fact-checking’s prominence has grown in recent years, little is known about public attitudes toward the format or how exposure to it affects the accuracy of people’s beliefs about controversial political issues. Fact-check readers appear to be better informed than we might otherwise expect, but this inference is limited by the fact that individuals self-select into fact-checking exposure. During the 2014 campaign, we therefore randomly exposed a representative panel of Americans to receive factchecking or placebo content over multiple survey waves. Our findings indicate that fact-checking exposure significantly increases the accuracy of people’s beliefs about contested political claims, especially among individuals with high political knowledge. Notably, we find only limited evidence that these effects vary by whether the fact-check is politically congenial to respondents. Our data also indicates that educated and politically sophisticated people are more interested in fact-checking andthat Republicans feel less positively about the practice than Democrats.
http://www.dartmouth.edu/%7Enyhan/fact-checking-effects.pdf
Bookworm about 6 years ago
“I may not always be right, but by God, I ain’t never wrong!” The late "Brother Dave Gardener.
Cheapskate0 about 6 years ago
Old Guy says, “referring to people using a racist slur.” Are you referring to Carmen being Hispanic (though often mistaken for black)? Just curious.