Social Connection Trumps Shared Ideology in Online Fact-Checking Engagement: New Study Reveals
In an era dominated by the rapid spread of misinformation online, fact-checking has emerged as a critical tool for combating falsehoods and promoting accurate information. However, the effectiveness of fact-checking hinges on a crucial factor: audience engagement. A new study challenges the prevailing assumption that corrections are more impactful when delivered by someone sharing the recipient’s political views. Published in PLOS ONE, the research, conducted in collaboration with MIT Sloan School of Management and the University of Oxford, reveals that even minimal social connections, such as a follow or like on social media, significantly influence engagement with fact-checks, regardless of political alignment. This finding suggests that fostering social ties may be more effective than appealing to shared ideology in encouraging individuals to consider corrective information.
The study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining a large-scale field experiment on Twitter (now X) with controlled survey experiments. This dual methodology allowed researchers to observe real-world behavior and investigate the underlying psychological mechanisms driving engagement. The field experiment provided ecological validity, mirroring the complexities of online interactions, while the survey experiments allowed for controlled manipulation of variables, isolating the impact of social connection and shared partisanship. This rigorous approach strengthens the study’s findings and provides valuable insights into how individuals process and respond to corrective information online.
Results from both the field and survey experiments consistently demonstrated the power of social connection. Participants were significantly more likely to engage with corrections – through replies, likes, or other interactions – when the corrector had previously interacted with them, even superficially. Surprisingly, shared political affiliation did not independently increase engagement. This suggests that fundamental social norms, such as the inclination to reciprocate interaction, may outweigh ideological agreement in prompting online engagement. The findings underscore the importance of building rapport and establishing even minimal social connections before attempting to correct misinformation.
This research offers practical implications for combating misinformation online. Rather than solely focusing on crafting persuasive arguments or tailoring messages to specific political audiences, the study suggests that investing in building social bridges, even through small gestures like follows or likes, can significantly enhance the reception of corrective information. This approach leverages inherent social dynamics to encourage engagement and create an environment more receptive to fact-checking efforts. By establishing a sense of connection, correctors can increase the likelihood that their message will be considered, regardless of pre-existing political differences.
However, the study also reveals a critical caveat. Among highly partisan individuals, minimal social connections from those holding opposing political viewpoints actually decreased engagement with fact-checks. This finding highlights the challenges in reaching the most polarized segments of the online population and suggests that overt signals of political identity can sometimes be counterproductive. It underscores the complex interplay between social connection and political polarization, indicating that while minimal connections can bridge divides in some cases, they can also exacerbate them in others, particularly among those with strong partisan identities.
Despite this challenge, the research offers a novel perspective on designing effective interventions, both human-led and automated, aimed at correcting misinformation. It emphasizes the importance of considering not just the content of the correction but also the relationship, however tenuous, between the messenger and the recipient. The study demonstrates that effective communication online goes beyond the message and the messenger; it depends on fostering a sense of connection and reciprocal engagement. This nuanced understanding of online dynamics provides valuable guidance for developing strategies to combat misinformation and promote informed discourse in the increasingly polarized digital landscape. By prioritizing the establishment of social connections, even minimal ones, fact-checkers and platforms can create an environment more conducive to receptive dialogue and the acceptance of corrective information.