Search
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Mini-Conference
Browse By Division
Browse By Session or Event Type
Browse Sessions by Fields of Interest
Browse Papers by Fields of Interest
Search Tips
Conference
Location
About APSA
Personal Schedule
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Democratic societies have increasingly turned to fact-checks to address manipulative communication tactics, disinformation, and hate. Encouragingly, a growing body of contemporary research consistently supports the effectiveness of fact-checking messages. These studies indicate that fact-checking interventions are persuasive, effectively shifting readers' beliefs about specific factual claims. Somewhat surprisingly, the existing literature has found fact checks to be persuasive at addressing misinformation irrespective of the participants’ political leanings.
However, a critical limitation of most existing research lies in its reliance on stylized experiments, which often fail to account for the credibility of the organization conducting the fact-check. In daily life, the context in which readers encounter fact-checking is considerably more complex. Often, political figures disseminate these fact-checks, or the fact-checks themselves become subjects of discussion and critique.
To more accurately capture this setting, the present study conducted two experiments. In the first experiment (Study 1), participants were exposed to allegations of political bias regarding the source of the fact-checking. In the second experiment (Study 2), participants encountered critiques of the fact-checking content from political elites (such as in-party politicians or renowned journalists). Our findings reveal that even in the face of bias allegations, the persuasive effect of fact-checking remains consistent. However, this effect diminishes when the fact-checking is accompanied by criticisms from political elites. This result suggests that, in the absence of direct criticism from political elites, the persuasive effect of fact-checking retains its efficacy, even among individuals with strong partisan affiliations.