Fact-checking is vital in combating misinformation, yet concerns persist regarding potential unintended effects on media trust. This study investigates causal dynamics between exposure to fact-checks and media trust over time, using a random intercept cross-lagged panel model (RI-CLPM) with longitudinal panel data from Flanders (Belgium) across three waves in 6 months before the 2024 elections. Findings indicate that people who encounter more fact-checks are also more likely to have higher trust in media. However, we found no causal relationship, suggesting that fact-checking neither erodes nor enhances media trust over time. Amid growing scrutiny of fact-checking by political actors and technology platforms, these results challenge assumptions about negative spillover effects of fact-checking.
AcerbiAAltaySMercierH (2022) Research note: Fighting misinformation or fighting for information?Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review. 10.37016/mr-2020-87.
2.
AharoniTBadenCOverbeckM, et al. (2024) Re-assessing the dynamics of news use and trust: A multi-outlet perspective. Communication Research52(6): 826–855.
3.
AltaySLyonsBAModirrousta-GalianA (2024) Exposure to higher rates of false news erodes media trust and fuels overconfidence. Mass Communication and Society28(2): 301–325.
4.
AmazeenMA (2019) Practitioner perceptions: Critical junctures and the global emergence and challenges of fact-checking. International Communication Gazette81(6–8): 541–561.
5.
AmazeenMAVargoCJHoppT (2019) Reinforcing attitudes in a gatewatching news era: Individual-level antecedents to sharing fact-checks on social media. Communication Monographs86(1): 112–132.
6.
BachmannIValenzuelaS (2023) Studying the downstream effects of fact-checking on social media: Experiments on correction formats, belief accuracy, and media trust. Social Media and Society9(2): 1–13.
7.
Bélair-GagnonVLarsenRGravesLWestlundO, et al. (2023) Knowledge work in platform fact-checking partnerships. International Journal of Communication17: 1169–1189.
8.
BrookesSWallerL (2023) Communities of practice in the production and resourcing of fact-checking. Journalism24(9): 1938–1958.
9.
CarsonAGibbonsAMartinA, et al. (2022) Does third-party fact-checking increase trust in news stories? An Australian case study using the ‘sports rorts’ affair. Digital Journalism10(5): 801–822.
10.
ClaytonKBlairSBusamJA, et al. (2020) Real solutions for fake news? Measuring the effectiveness of general warnings and fact-check tags in reducing belief in false stories on social media. Political Behavior42(4): 1073–1095.
11.
ComptonJ (2021) Threat and/in inoculation theory. International Journal of Communication15: 4294–4306.
12.
CurryALStroudNJ (2021) The effects of journalistic transparency on credibility assessments and engagement intentions. Journalism22(4): 901–918.
13.
EchterhoffGGrollSHirstW (2007) Tainted truth: Overcorrection for misinformation influence on eyewitness memory. Social Cognition25(3): 367–409.
14.
EngelkeKMHaseVWintterlinF (2019) On measuring trust and distrust in journalism: Reflection of the status quo and suggestions for the road ahead. Journal of Trust Research9(1): 66–86.
15.
FawziNSteindlNObermaierM, et al. (2021) Concepts, causes and consequences of trust in news media – a literature review and framework. Annals of the International Communication Association45(2): 154–174.
16.
FletcherRAndıSBadrinathanS, et al. (2025) The link between changing news use and trust: Longitudinal analysis of 46 countries. Journal of Communication75(1): 1–15.
17.
FreitagJGocheeMRansdenM, et al. (2024) The corrections dilemma: Media retractions increase belief accuracy but decrease trust. Journal of Experimental Political Science11(1): 90–101.
18.
GravesL (2018) Boundaries not drawn: Mapping the institutional roots of the global fact-checking movement. Journalism Studies19(5): 613–631.
19.
GravesLBélair-GagnonVLarsenR (2023) From public reason to public health: Professional implications of the ‘debunking turn’ in the global fact-checking field. Digital Journalism12(10): 1417–1436.
20.
GuayBBerinskyAJPennycookG, et al. (2023) How to think about whether misinformation interventions work. Nature Human Behaviour7(8): 1231–1233.
21.
GuessANyhanB (2018) Selective Exposure to Misinformation: Evidence From the Consumption of Fake News During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Campaign. Brussels: European Research Council.
22.
GuessAMLernerMLyonsB, et al. (2020) A digital media literacy intervention increases discernment between mainstream and false news in the United States and India. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences117(27): 15536–15545.
23.
HamakerELKuiperRMGrasmanRP (2015) A critique of the cross-lagged panel model. Psychological Methods20(1): 102–116.
24.
HameleersMBrosiusAMarquartF, et al. (2022) Mistake or manipulation? Conceptualizing perceived mis- and disinformation among news consumers in 10 European countries. Communication Research49(7): 919–941.
25.
HameleersMVan Der MeerT (2023) Striking the balance between fake and real: Under what conditions can media literacy messages that warn about misinformation maintain trust in accurate information?Behaviour & Information Technology56(11): 1–36.
26.
HanitzschTVan DalenASteindlN (2018) Caught in the nexus: A comparative and longitudinal analysis of public trust in the press. The International Journal of Press/Politics23(1): 3–23.
27.
HoesEAitkenBZhangJ, et al. (2024) Prominent misinformation interventions reduce misperceptions but increase scepticism. Nature Human Behaviour8(8): 1545–1553.
28.
HoesEClemmBGesslerT, et al. (2022). The cure worse than the disease? How the media’s attention to misinformation decreases trust. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/4m92p
29.
HumprechtEEsserFVan AelstP (2020) Resilience to online disinformation: A framework for cross-national comparative research. The International Journal of Press/Politics25(3): 493–516.
KozyrevaALorenz-SpreenPHerzogSM, et al. (2024) Toolbox of individual-level interventions against online misinformation. Nature Human Behaviour8(6): 1044–1052.
34.
LauerLGravesL (2024) How to grow a transnational field: A network analysis of the global fact-checking movement. New Media & Society27(6): 3505–3523.
35.
LyonsBMérolaVReiflerJ, et al. (2020) How politics shape views toward fact-checking: Evidence from six European countries. The International Journal of Press/Politics25(3): 469–492.
36.
Modirrousta-GalianAHighamA (2023) Gamified inoculation interventions do not improve discrimination between true and fake news: Reanalyzing existing research with receiver operating characteristic analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General152(9): 2411–2437. 10.1037/xge0001395.
37.
MoslehMYangQZamanT, et al. (2024) Differences in misinformation sharing can lead to politically asymmetric sanctions. Nature634(8034): 609–616.
38.
MulderJDHamakerEL (2021) Three extensions of the random intercept cross-lagged panel model. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal28(4): 638–648.
39.
MüllerJ (2013) Mechanisms of Trust: News Media in Democratic and Authoritarian Regimes. Frankfurt a. M.: Campus Verlag.
40.
NewmanNFletcherRRobertsonCT, et al. (2016) Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2016. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
41.
OgnyanovaKLazerDRobertsonRE, et al. (2020) Misinformation in action: Fake news exposure is linked to lower trust in media, higher trust in government when your side is in power. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review. https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-024.
42.
OpgenhaffenM (2022) Fact-checking interventions on social media using cartoon figures: Lessons learned from ‘the Tooties’. Digital Journalism10(5): 888–911.
43.
ParkCS (2024) Why people rely on fact-checkers? Testing theses of ‘perceived severity of fake news’ and ‘disappointment in news media’. Journalism Studies25(1): 1–18.
44.
ParryDADavidsonBISewallCJR, et al. (2021) A systematic review and meta-analysis of discrepancies between logged and self-reported digital media use. Nature Human Behaviour5(11): 1535–1547.
45.
PingreeRJWatsonBSuiM, et al. (2018) Checking facts and fighting back: Why journalists should defend their profession. PLoS One13(12): e0208600.
46.
PorterEWoodTJ (2024) Factual corrections: Concerns and current evidence. Current Opinion in Psychology55: 101715.
47.
PorterEthanWoodThomas J (2021) The global effectiveness of fact-checking: Evidence from simultaneous experiments in Argentina, Nigeria, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118(37): e2104235118.
48.
PrimigF (2024) The influence of media trust and normative role expectations on the credibility of fact checkers. Journalism Practice18(5): 1137–1157.
49.
RobertsonCTMourãoRRThorsonE (2020) Who uses fact-checking sites? The impact of demographics, political antecedents, and media use on fact-checking site awareness, attitudes, and behavior. The International Journal of Press/Politics25(2): 217–237.
50.
SchudsonM (2008) Six or seven things news can do for democracy. In: Why Democracies Need an Unlovable Press. Cambridge: Polity Press, 11–26.
51.
SeetSTandocEC (2024) Show me the facts: Newsroom-affiliated and independent fact-checkers’ transparency acts. Digital Journalism12(10): 1485–1504.
52.
SlaterMD (2015) Reinforcing spirals model: Conceptualizing the relationship between media content exposure and the development and maintenance of attitudes. Media Psychology18(3): 370–395.
53.
SlaterMDShehataAStrömbäckJ (2020) Reinforcing spirals model. In: The International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 1–11.
StrömbäckJDjerf-PierreMShehataA (2016) A question of time? A longitudinal analysis of the relationship between news Media consumption and political trust. The International Journal of Press/Politics21(1): 88–110.
56.
StrömbäckJShehataA (2010) Media malaise or a virtuous circle? Exploring the causal relationships between news media exposure, political news attention and political interest. European Journal of Political Research49(5): 575–597.
57.
StrömbäckJTsfatiYBoomgaardenH, et al. (2020) News media trust and its impact on media use: Toward a framework for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association44(2): 139–156.
58.
StubenvollMHeissRMatthesJ (2021) Media trust under threat: Antecedents and consequences of misinformation perceptions on social media. International Journal of Communication15: 2765–2786.
59.
TandocECJrDuffyAJones-JangSM, et al. (2021). Poisoning the information well?: The impact of fake news on news media credibility. Journal of Language and Politics, 20(5), 783–802.
60.
ThomasFShehataAOttoLP, et al. (2021) How to capture reciprocal communication dynamics: Comparing longitudinal statistical approaches in order to analyze within- and between-person effects. Journal of Communication71(2): 187–219.
61.
TsfatiYArielyG (2014) Individual and contextual correlates of trust in media across 44 countries. Communication Research41(6): 760–782.
62.
TsfatiYBoomgaardenHGStrömbäckJ, et al. (2020) Causes and consequences of mainstream media dissemination of fake news: literature review and synthesis. Annals of the International Communication Association44(2): 157–173. 10.1080/23808985.2020.1759443.
63.
TsfatiYVliegenthartRStrömbäckJ, et al. (2024) An asymmetrical reinforcing spiral? Disentangling the longitudinal dynamics of media use and mainstream media trust. Journal of Communication75(1): 16–26.
64.
TulinMHameleersMde VreeseC, et al. (2024) Beyond belief correction: Effects of the truth sandwich on perceptions of fact-checkers and verification intentions. Journalism Practice19(11): 2576–2595.
65.
ValenzuelaSDiehlTLeeS, et al. (2023) A panel study on the dynamics of social media use and conspiracy thinking. Media Psychology27(6): 817–841.
66.
Van AelstPStrömbäckJAalbergT, et al. (2017) Political communication in a high-choice media environment: A challenge for democracy?Annals of the International Communication Association41(1): 3–27.
67.
van der MeerTGLAHameleersMOhmeJ (2023) Can fighting misinformation have a negative spillover effect? How warnings for the threat of misinformation can decrease general news credibility. Journalism Studies24(6): 803–823.
68.
VermeerSKruikemeierSTrillingD, et al. (2022) Using panel data to study political interest, news media trust, and news Media use in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Journalism Studies23(5–6): 740–760.
69.
WalterNCohenJHolbertRL, et al. (2020) Fact-checking: A meta-analysis of what works and for whom. Political Communication37(3): 350–375.
70.
WoutersFOpgenhaffenM (2024) Regional facts matter: A comparative perspective of sub-state fact-checking initiatives in Europe. Media and Communication12: 1–21.
71.
ZyphurMJAllisonPDTayL, et al. (2020) From data to causes I: Building a general cross-lagged panel model (GCLM). Organisational Research Methods23(4): 651–687.
