The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The roles of information deficits and identity threat in the prevalence of misperceptions
Open accessAbstract
Why do so many Americans hold misperceptions? We examine two factors that contribute to the prevalence of these beliefs. First, presenting correct information should reduce misperceptions, especially if provided in a clear and compelling format. We therefore test the effect of graphical information, which may be especially effective in facilitating belief updating about changes in quantities over time. In some cases, though, people may reject information because it threatens their worldview or self-concept – a mechanism that can be revealed by affirming individuals’ self-worth, which could make them more willing to acknowledge uncomfortable facts. We test both mechanisms jointly. In three experiments, we find that providing information in graphical form reduces misperceptions. A third study shows that this effect is greater than for equivalent textual information. Our findings for self-affirmation are more equivocal. We find limited evidence that self-affirmation can help diminish misperceptions when no other information is provided, but it does not consistently increase willingness to accept corrective information as previous research in social psychology would suggest. These results suggest that misperceptions are caused by a lack of information as well as psychological threat, but that these factors may interact in ways that are not yet well understood.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The case for motivated reasoning.
Kunda, Z. (1990) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 · Cited by 9,022
The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion
Zaller, J. R. (1992) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511818691 · Cited by 7,785
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. R. (1979) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098 · Cited by 4,583
Motivated Skepticism in the Evaluation of Political Beliefs
Taber, C. S., & Lodge, M. (2006) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2006.00214.x · Cited by 4,344
The Psychology of Self-Affirmation: Sustaining the Integrity of the Self
Steele, C. M. (1988) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60229-4 · Cited by 3,697
Beyond the Running Tally: Partisan Bias in Political Perceptions
Bartels, L. M. (2002) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1023/a:1021226224601 · Cited by 1,468
The Difference Between “Significant” and “Not Significant” is not Itself Statistically Significant
Gelman, A., & Stern, H. (2006) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1198/000313006x152649 · Cited by 1,407 · cited 1×
“…negative but 3We find no evidence of significant imbalance on covariates in balance tests (results available upon request). not significant (p < .15), though we cannot directly reject the null of no difference in Graph effects between withdrawal opponents and other groups (Gelman and Stern 2006).”
ResultCognitive Fit: A Theory‐Based Analysis of the Graphs Versus Tables Literature*
Vessey, I. (1991) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1991.tb00344.x · Cited by 1,263
Political ignorance and collective policy preferences
Gilens, M. (2001) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.1017/s0003055401002222 · Cited by 764
When beliefs yield to evidence: Reducing biased evaluation by affirming the self
Cohen, G. L., Aronson, J., & Steele, C. M. (2000) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/01461672002611011 · Cited by 584
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- 10.2307/2585480 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/jcom.12171 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.2307/1955648 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.458 · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.28.3.458 · Paper page
- 10.1198/000313002317572790 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/0093650211416646 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/pops.12244 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1002/j.1538-165X.2003.tb00406.x · DOI · Paper page
- Lupia A., 1998, The Democratic Dilemma
- 10.1111/j.1533-8525.2011.01198.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1518/001872099779656707 · DOI
- 10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1468-2508.00161 · DOI · Paper page
- Stroud, N. J. 2015. “Self-affirmation, Moral Foundations, and Disrupting Partisan Selectivity.” Unpublished manuscript presented at the conference of the National Communication Association.
- Turk-Browne, N. B., J. A. Jungé, and B. J. Scholl. 2005. “The Automaticity of Visual Statistical Learning.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 134 (4): 552–564. · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/h0074758 · DOI
Cited by
The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y · Cited by 1,372
Why do people believe COVID-19 conspiracy theories?
Uscinski, J. E., Enders, A. M., Klofstad, C., Seelig, M., Funchion, J., Everett, C., Wuchty, S., Premaratne, K., & Murthi, M. (2020) · Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review · doi:10.37016/mr-2020-015 · Cited by 429
The muted consequences of correct information about immigration
Hopkins, D. J., Sides, J., & Citrin, J. (2019) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1086/699914 · Cited by 415
Social Media, Echo Chambers, and Political Polarization
Barberá, P. (2020) · Social Media and Democracy · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.004 · Cited by 373
Hahl, O., Kim, M., & Zuckerman Sivan, E. W. (2018) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.1177/0003122417749632 · Cited by 300
Metadata
- Authors
- Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2018-05-06
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 222-244
- ISSN
- 1368-9886 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-7289
- 1745-7297
- OpenAlex
- W2799996710
- Cited by
- 229
- References
- 13
- FWCI
- 67.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- Funders
- Robert Wood Johnson Foundation
- European Research Council (682785)
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The roles of information deficits and identity threat in the prevalence of misperceptions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/17457289.2018.1465061
- The paper
- Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2019). The roles of information deficits and identity threat in the prevalence of misperceptions. Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457289.2018.1465061
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
