This study examines the relationship between personal traits, news use via YouTube algorithmic searches, and engagement with misinformation about U.S. Muslim congresswomen. Based on analyses of survey data, we find that those with lower cognitive ability and frequent algorithmic use were more likely to believe and share misinformation. Republicans and those with higher levels of nationalism and prejudice against Muslims were also more likely to believe the misinformation. Moderation findings suggest that higher algorithmic use strengthens belief in misinformation about U.S. Muslim congresswomen. The results highlight the importance of both individual ideologies and systematic factors in understanding misinformation engagement.
AhmedS. (2021). Who inadvertently shares deepfakes? Analyzing the role of political interest, cognitive ability, and social network size. Telematics and Informatics, 57, 101508.
2.
AllcottH.GentzkowM. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236.
3.
BagoB.RandD. G.PennycookG. (2020). Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology General, 149(8), 1608–1613.
4.
BailC. A.ArgyleL. P.BrownT. W.BumpusJ. P.ChenH.HunzakerM. F.. . . VolfovskyA. (2018). Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(37), 9216–9221.
5.
BürgerT.JansenM.RossK. (2020). Not all tweets are created equal: Gender and politics in the platform age. Feminist Media Studies, 20(4), 586–589.
6.
CampbellS. W.KwakN. (2011). Political involvement in “mobilized” society: The interactive relationships among mobile communication, network characteristics, and political participation. Journal of Communication, 61(6), 1005–1024.
ChoJ.AhmedS.HilbertM.LiuB.LuuJ. (2020). Do search algorithms endanger democracy? An experimental investigation of algorithm effects on political polarization. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 64(2), 150–172.
9.
CollianderJ. (2019). “This is fake news”: Investigating the role of conformity to other users’ views when commenting on and spreading disinformation in social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 97, 202–215.
10.
DasguptaP.SanjeevG. (2019). Narrow Identities. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, 175(3), 395–419.
11.
DevineP. G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(1), 5–18.
12.
DotschR.WigboldusD. H.LangnerO.van KnippenbergA. (2008). Ethnic out-group faces are biased in the prejudiced mind. Psychological Science, 19(10), 978–980.
13.
EvansJ.FrankishK. (2009). In two minds: Dual processes and beyond (Vol. 10). Oxford University Press.
14.
EvansJ.StanovichK. E. (2013). Dual-process theories of higher cognition: Advancing the debate. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(3), 223–241.
15.
FaragóL.KendeA.KrekóP. (2020). We only believe in news that we doctored ourselves: The connection between partisanship and political fake news. Social Psychology, 51(2), 77–90.
16.
FeezellJ. T.WagnerJ. K.ConroyM. (2021). Exploring the effects of algorithm-driven news sources on political behavior and polarization. Computers in Human Behavior, 116, 106626.
17.
FeldmanL.WojcieszakM.StroudN. J.BimberB. (2018). Explaining media choice: The role of issue-specific engagement in predicting interest-based and partisan selectivity. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 62(1), 109–130.
18.
FiskeS. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 2(4), 357–411.
19.
FletcherR.NielsenR. K. (2018). Automated serendipity: The effect of using search engines on news repertoire balance and diversity. Digital Journalism, 6(8), 976–989.
20.
FuchsC. (2019). Nationalism on the internet: Critical theory and ideology in the age of social media and fake news. Routledge.
21.
GottfredsonL. S. (1997). Why g matters: The complexity of everyday life. Intelligence, 24(1), 79–132.
22.
GrinbergN.JosephK.FriedlandL.Swire-ThompsonB.LazerD. (2019). Fake news on Twitter during the 2016 US presidential election. Science, 363(6425), 374–378.
23.
GuessA.NaglerJ.TuckerJ. (2019). Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Science Advances, 5(1), eaau4586.
24.
HaimM.GraefeA.BrosiusH. B. (2018). Burst of the filter bubble? Effects of personalization on the diversity of Google News. Digital Journalism, 6(3), 330–343.
25.
HameleersM.van der MeerT. G. (2020). Misinformation and polarization in a high-choice media environment: How effective are political fact-checkers?Communication Research, 47(2), 227–250.
26.
HilbeJ. M. (2011). Negative binomial regression. Cambridge University Press.
27.
HilbertM.AhmedS.ChoJ.LiuB.LuuJ. (2018). Communicating with algorithms: A transfer entropy analysis of emotions-based escapes from online echo chambers. Communication Methods and Measures, 12(4), 260–275.
28.
HusseinE.JunejaP.MitraT. (2020). Measuring misinformation in video search platforms: An audit study on YouTube. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 4(CSCW1), 1–27.
29.
HwangY.JeongS. H. (2021). Misinformation exposure and acceptance: The role of information seeking and processing. Health Communication. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1964187
30.
JaccardJ.WanC. K.TurrisiR. (1990). The detection and interpretation of interaction effects between continuous variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25(4), 467–478.
31.
JiaL.KarpenS. C.HirtE. R. (2011). Beyond anti-Muslim sentiment: Opposing the Ground Zero mosque as a means to pursuing a stronger America. Psychological Science, 22(10), 1327–1335.
32.
JungJ. H. (2012). Islamophobia? Religion, contact with Muslims, and the respect for Islam. Review of Religious Research, 54, 113–126.
33.
KahanD. M. (2017, May24). Misconceptions, misinformation, and the logic of identity-protective cognition. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2973067
KulshresthaJ.EslamiM.MessiasJ.ZafarM. B.GhoshS.GummadiK. P.KarahaliosK. (2019). Search bias quantification: Investigating political bias in social media and web search. Information Retrieval Journal, 22(1–2), 188–227.
36.
KundaZ. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498.
37.
LambrechtA.TuckerC. (2019). Algorithmic bias? An empirical study of apparent gender-based discrimination in the display of STEM career ads. Management Science, 65(7), 2966–2981.
38.
LazerD. (2015). The rise of the social algorithm. Science, 348(6239), 1090–1091.
39.
LazerD.BaumM. A.BenklerY.BerinskyA. J.GreenhillK. M.MenczerF.. . . ZittrainJ. L. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096.
40.
LemosA. L. M.BitencourtE. C.dos SantosJ. G. B. (2021). Fake news as fake politics: The digital materialities of YouTube misinformation videos about Brazilian oil spill catastrophe. Media, Culture & Society, 43(5), 886–905.
41.
LiQ.BrewerM. B. (2004). What does it mean to be an American? Patriotism, nationalism, and American identity after 9/11. Political Psychology, 25(5), 727–739.
42.
LievenA. (2012). America right or wrong: An anatomy of American nationalism. Oxford University Press.
43.
MakhortykhM.UrmanA.RobertoU. (2020). How search engines disseminate information about COVID-19 and why they should do better. The Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 1, 1–12.
44.
MarwickA. E. (2018). Why do people share fake news? A sociotechnical model of media effects. Georgetown Law Technology Review, 2(2), 474–512.
45.
MourãoR. R.RobertsonC. T. (2019). Fake news as discursive integration: An analysis of sites that publish false, misleading, hyperpartisan and sensational information. Journalism Studies, 20(14), 2077–2095.
46.
MummendeyA.KlinkA.BrownR. (2001). Nationalism and patriotism: National identification and out-group rejection. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40(2), 159–172.
47.
MurphyG.LoftusE. F.GradyR. H.LevineL. J.GreeneC. M. (2019). False memories for fake news during Ireland’s abortion referendum. Psychological Science, 30(10), 1449–1459.
48.
NickersonR. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175–220.
49.
NisbetE. C.OstmanR.ShanahanJ. (2009). Public opinion toward Muslim Americans: Civil liberties and the role of religiosity, ideology, and media use. In SinnoA. (Ed.), Muslims in western politics (pp. 161–199). Indiana University Press.
50.
NobleS. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. New York University Press.
51.
OhmeJ. (2021). Algorithmic social media use and its relationship to attitude reinforcement and issue-specific political participation—The case of the 2015 European immigration movements. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 18(1), 36–54.
52.
PariserE. (2011). The filter bubble: What the internet is hiding from you. Penguin Books.
53.
PasekJ.StarkT. H.KrosnickJ. A.TompsonT. (2015). What motivates a conspiracy theory? Birther beliefs, partisanship, liberal-conservative ideology, and anti-Black attitudes. Electoral Studies, 40, 482–489.
PennycookG.CannonT. D.RandD. G. (2018). Prior exposure increases perceived accuracy of fake news. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147(12), 1865–1880.
56.
PennycookG.McPhetresJ.ZhangY.LuJ. G.RandD. G. (2020). Fighting COVID-19 misinformation on social media: Experimental evidence for a scalable accuracy-nudge intervention. Psychological Science, 31(7), 770–780.
57.
PennycookG.RandD. G. (2019). Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition, 188, 39–50.
58.
PereiraA.HarrisE.Van BavelJ. J. (2021). Identity concerns drive belief: The impact of partisan identity on the belief and dissemination of true and false news. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684302211030004
RaneH.EwartJ.MartinkusJ. (2014). Media framing of the Muslim world: Conflicts, crises and contexts. Springer.
61.
RibeiroF. N.SahaK.BabaeiM.HenriqueL.MessiasJ.BenevenutoF.. . . RedmilesE. M. (2019, January). On microtargeting socially divisive ads: A case study of Russia-linked ad campaigns on Facebook. In Proceedings of the Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (pp. 140–149). https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3287560.3287580
62.
RoetsA. (2017). ‘Fake news’: Incorrect, but hard to correct. The role of cognitive ability on the impact of false information on social impressions. Intelligence, 65, 107–110.
RossR. M.RandD.PennycookG. (2021). Beyond “fake news”: Analytic thinking and the detection of false and hyperpartisan news headlines. Judgment and Decision Making, 16(2), 484–504.
65.
ScharkowM.MangoldF.StierS.BreuerJ. (2020). How social network sites and other online intermediaries increase exposure to news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117(6), 2761–2763. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1918279117
66.
SchleiE. L. (2020). The monster at the end of this: A feminist media analysis of coverage of representative Ilhan Omar [Doctoral dissertation, Minnesota State University].
67.
SlaterM. D. (2015). Reinforcing spirals model: Conceptualizing the relationship between media content exposure and the development and maintenance of attitudes. Media Psychology, 18(3), 370–395.
StephanW. G.StephanC. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. In OskampS. (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Erlbaum.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Nelson-Hall.
73.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C.AustinW. G.WorchelS. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In HatchM. J.SchultzM. (Eds.), Organizational identity: A reader (pp. 56–65). Oxford University Press.
74.
TangL.FujimotoK.AmithM. T.CunninghamR.CostantiniR. A.YorkF.XiongG.BoomJ. A.TaoC. (2021). “Down the rabbit hole” of vaccine misinformation on YouTube: Network exposure study. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(1), e23262.
ValentinoN. A.BraderT.JardinaA. E. (2013). Immigration opposition among US Whites: General ethnocentrism or media priming of attitudes about Latinos?Political Psychology, 34(2), 149–166.
77.
ValenzuelaS.HalpernD.KatzJ. E.MirandaJ. P. (2019). The paradox of participation versus misinformation: Social media, political engagement, and the spread of misinformation. Digital Journalism, 7(6), 802–823.
78.
VerkuytenM.YildizA. A. (2009). Muslim immigrants and religious group feelings: Self-identification and attitudes among Sunni and Alevi Turkish-Dutch. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 32(7), 1121–1142.
79.
VosoughiS.RoyD.AralS. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151.
80.
WassermanH.Madrid-MoralesD. (2019). An exploratory study of “fake news” and media trust in Kenya, Nigeria and South Africa. African Journalism Studies, 40(1), 107–123.
81.
XiaoX.BorahP.SuY. (2021). The dangers of blind trust: Examining the interplay among social media news use, misinformation identification, and news trust on conspiracy beliefs. Public Understanding of Science, 30(8), 977–992.
82.
ZhuB.ChenC.LoftusE. F.LinC.HeQ.ChenC.DongQ. (2010). Individual differences in false memory from misinformation: Cognitive factors. Memory, 18(5), 543–555.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
