Personality and misinformation

Who Falls for Misinformation and Why?

Misinformation is widespread, but only some people accept the false information they encounter. This raises two questions: Who falls for misinformation, and why do they fall for misinformation? To address these questions, two studies investigated associations between 15 individual-difference dimensions and judgments of misinformation as true. Using Signal Detection Theory, the studies further investigated whether the obtained associations are driven by individual differences in truth sensitivity, acceptance threshold, or myside bias. For both political misinformation (Study 1) and misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines (Study 2), truth sensitivity was positively associated with cognitive reflection and actively open-minded thinking, and negatively associated with bullshit receptivity and conspiracy mentality. Although acceptance threshold and myside bias explained considerable variance in judgments of misinformation as true, neither showed robust associations with the measured individual-difference dimensions. The findings provide deeper insights into individual differences in misinformation susceptibility and uncover critical gaps in their scientific understanding.

Prenatal Attachment, Personality, and Depression in High-Risk Pregnancies During Pandemic Emergencies

Background: The observational study investigates how personality factors influence depression, prenatal attachment, and fear of COVID-19 in women with high-risk pregnancies. Methods: Women experiencing a high-risk pregnancy between the 20th and 24th weeks of gestation (N = 84) were selected. The Personality Inventory (PI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Prenatal Attachment Inventory (PAI), and Fear of COVID (FCV-19S) were used for data collection. Results: Agreeableness was significantly negatively correlated with fear of COVID-19 (r = -0.33, p = 0.002) and positively correlated with prenatal attachment (r = 0.28, p = 0.008). Conscientiousness was negatively correlated with prenatal attachment (r = 0.34, p = 0.001). Depression was positively correlated with fear of COVID-19 (r = 0.27, p = 0.013). Linear regressions showed that agreeableness negatively predicted fear of COVID-19 (β = -0.34, p = 0.002) and positively predicted prenatal attachment (β = 0.27, p = 0.008). Conscientiousness negatively influenced prenatal attachment (β = -0.35, p = 0.001). Conclusions: This study explores personality traits in high-risk pregnancies, a variable underexplored in this clinical population. High-risk pregnancies may lead to adverse outcomes for both mother and child.

Can Media Literacy Intervention Improve Fake News Credibility Assessment? A Meta-Analysis

Fake news impacts individuals' behavior and decision-making while also disrupting political processes, perceptions of medical advice, and societal trends. Improving individuals' ability to accurately assess fake news can reduce its harmful effects. However, previous research on media literacy interventions designed for improving fake news credibility assessments has yielded inconsistent results. We systematically collected 33 independent studies and performed a meta-analysis to examine the effects of media literacy interventions on assessing fake news credibility (n = 36,256). The results showed that media literacy interventions significantly improved fake news credibility assessments (Hedges' g = 0.53, 95% confidence interval [0.29-0.78], p < 0.001). Gaming interventions were the most effective intervention form. Conversely, the intervention channel, outcome measurement, and subject characteristics (age, gender, and country development level) did not influence the intervention effects.