Cited by 264Misinformation and Its ImpactsElectoral Systems and Political ParticipationMedia Influence and Politics

Political Misinformation

Open access
Jerit, Jennifer, Zhao, Yangzi·2020·Annual Review of Political Science

Abstract

Misinformation occurs when people hold incorrect factual beliefs and do so confidently. The problem, first conceptualized by Kuklinski and colleagues in 2000, plagues political systems and is exceedingly difficult to correct. In this review, we assess the empirical literature on political misinformation in the United States and consider what scholars have learned since the publication of that early study. We conclude that research on this topic has developed unevenly. Over time, scholars have elaborated on the psychological origins of political misinformation, and this work has cumulated in a productive way. By contrast, although there is an extensive body of research on how to correct misinformation, this literature is less coherent in its recommendations. Finally, a nascent line of research asks whether people's reports of their factual beliefs are genuine or are instead a form of partisan cheerleading. Overall, scholarly research on political misinformation illustrates the many challenges inherent in representative democracy.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev-polisci-050718-032814

Cites

102 of 103 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Misinformation can lead to misperceptions.

    “Misinformation can lead to misperceptions, as discussed earlier with regard to elites (Jerit & Zhao, 2020).”

    From How to study democratic backsliding (2024) · cites this paper as Jerit & Zhao, 2020

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bullock JG. 2007. Experiments on partisanship and public opinion: party cues, false beliefs, and Bayesian updating. PhD Thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, CA
  2. etrds0222 · DOI
  3. etrds0417 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Nyhan B. 2010. Why the "death panel" myth wouldn't die: misinformation in the health care reform debate. Forum 8(1):5
  5. Sunstein CR. 2009. On Rumors: How Falsehoods Spread, Why We Believe Them, and What Can Be Done. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jerit, J., & Zhao, Y.
Affiliations
Stony Brook University (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Political Science
Published
2020-05-11
Volume
23
Issue
1
Pages
77-94
ISSN
  • 1094-2939 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-1577
OpenAlex
W4249407388
Cited by
263
References
102
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 33 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2
FWCI
5.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Annual Review of Political Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Houston
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Media Influence and Politics
Keywords
political misinformation, factual beliefs, belief confidence, misinformation correction, representative democracy, American politics

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