ABSTRACT

While research consistently shows that fact-checking improves belief accuracy, debates persist about how to best measure and interpret expressions of factual beliefs. We argue that this has led to ambiguity in interpreting the results of studies on fact-checking, including whether fact-checking effects in fact decrease confidently held false beliefs. In a two-wave, nationally representative online experiment on beliefs about immigration, we use a variety of theoretically motivated approaches toward observing the influence of fact-checking messages. Results suggest that the effects of fact-checking are robust to different methods of measuring misinformed beliefs – even after accounting for belief certainty – and across different analytical approaches. Effects are evident among those who harbored inaccurate beliefs with high degrees of confidence. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of these findings for future studies of corrections and practical implications for fact-checking efforts.

摘要

虽然研究一致表明事实检查可以提高信念的准确性，但关于如何最好地衡量和解释事实信念的表达的争论仍然存在。我们认为，这导致对事实核查研究结果的解释模棱两可，包括事实核查效果是否实际上减少了自信持有的错误信念。在关于移民信念的两波全国代表性在线实验中，我们使用各种理论上的方法来观察事实核查信息的影响。结果表明，事实检查的效果对于测量错误信念的不同方法（即使在考虑了信念确定性之后）以及不同的分析方法都是稳健的。在那些怀有高度自信的不准确信念的人中，效果很明显。