No abstract

Aim Previous research has focused on accuracy associated with real and fake news presented in the form of news headlines only, which does not capture the rich context news is frequently encountered in real life. Additionally, while previous studies on evaluation of real and fake news have mostly focused on characteristics of the evaluator (i.e., analytical reasoning), characteristics of the news stimuli (i.e., news source credibility) and the interplay between the two have been largely ignored. To address these research gaps, this project examined the role of analytical reasoning and news source credibility on evaluation of real and fake full-length news story articles. The project considered both accuracy and perceived credibility ratings as outcome variables, thus qualifying previous work focused solely on news detection accuracy. Method We conducted two independent but parallel studies, with Study 2 as a direct replication of Study 1, employing the same design but in a larger sample (Study 1: N = 292 vs. Study 2: N = 357). In both studies, participants viewed 12 full-length news articles (6 real, 6 fake), followed by prompts to evaluate each article’s veracity and credibility. Participants were randomly assigned to view articles with a credible or non-credible source and completed the Cognitive Reflection Test as well as short demographic questions. Findings Consistent across both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with greater fake news accuracy, while analytical reasoning was not associated with real news accuracy. In addition, in both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with lower perceived credibility for fake news, while analytical reasoning was not associated with perceived credibility for real news. Furthermore, lower analytical reasoning was associated with greater accuracy for real (but not fake) news from credible compared to non-credible sources, with this effect only detected in Study 2. Conclusions The novel results generated in this research are discussed in light of classical vs. naturalistic accounts of decision-making as well as cognitive processes underlying news articles evaluation. The results extend previous findings that analytical reasoning contributes to fake news detection to full-length news articles. Furthermore, news-related cues such as the credibility of the news source systematically affected discrimination ability between real and fake news.

Objectives Older adults are at high risk for complications from COVID-19. Health guidelines recommend limiting physical contact during the pandemic, drastically reducing opportunities for in-person social exchange. Older adults are also susceptible to negative consequences from loneliness and the COVID-19 pandemic has likely exacerbated this age-related vulnerability. Methods In 107 community-dwelling older individuals (65-90 years, 70.5% female) from Florida, U.S., and Ontario, Canada, we examined change in loneliness over the course of the pandemic after implementation of COVID-19 related physical distancing guidelines (March–September 2020; T1–T5; biweekly concurrent self-report) using multilevel modeling. We also explored gender differences in loneliness during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic at both data collection sites. Results Consistent across the two sites, levels of loneliness remained stable over time for the full sample (T1–T5). However, our exploratory moderation analysis suggested gender differences in the trajectory of loneliness between the U.S. and Canada, in that older men in Florida and older women in Ontario reported an increase in loneliness over time. Discussion Leveraging a longitudinal, bi-national dataset collected during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, this study advances understanding of stability and change in loneliness among a North American sample of individuals aged 65+ faced with the unique challenges of social isolation. These results can inform public-health policy in anticipation of future pandemics and highlight the need for targeted intervention to address acute loneliness among older populations.

Objectives Trust is crucial for successful social interaction across the lifespan. Perceiver age, facial age and facial emotion have been shown to influence trustworthiness perception, but the complex interplay between these perceiver and facial characteristics has not been examined. Method Adopting an adult lifespan developmental approach, 199 adults (aged 22-78 years) rated the trustworthiness of faces that systematically varied in age (young, middle-aged, older) and emotion (neutral, happy, sad, fearful, angry, disgusted) from the FACES Lifespan Database. Results The study yielded three key results. First, on an aggregated level, facial trustworthiness perception did not differ by perceiver age. Second, all perceivers rated young faces as most trustworthy; and middle-aged and older (but not young) perceivers rated older faces as least trustworthy. Third, facial emotions signaling threat (fear, anger, disgust) relative to neutral, happy, and sad expressions, moderated age effects on facial trustworthiness perception. Discussion Findings from this study highlight the impact of perceiver and facial characteristics on facial trustworthiness perception in adulthood and aging and have potential to inform first impression formation, with effects on trait attributions and behavior. This publication also provides normative data on perceived facial trustworthiness for the FACES Lifespan Database.

Aim: Previous research has focused on accuracy associated with real and fake news presented in the form of news headlines only which does not capture the rich context news is frequently encountered in real life. Additionally, while the impact of analytical reasoning on news evaluation accuracy has commonly been examined, the impact of news source credibility on real and fake news detection is understudied. To address these research gaps, this project examined the role of analytical reasoning and news source credibility on evaluation of real and fake full-length news story articles. The project considered both accuracy and perceived credibility ratings as outcome variables, thus qualifying previous work focused solely on news detection accuracy. Method: We conducted two independent but parallel studies, with Study 2 as a direct replication of Study 1, employing the same design but in a larger sample (Study 1: N = 292 vs. Study 2: N = 357). In both studies, participants viewed 12 full-length news articles (6 real, 6 fake), followed by prompts to evaluate each article’s veracity and credibility. Participants were randomly assigned to view articles with a credible or non-credible source and completed the Cognitive Reflection Test as well as short demographic questions.Findings: Consistent in both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with greater fake news accuracy, while analytical reasoning was not associated with real news accuracy. In addition, in both studies, higher analytical reasoning was associated with lower perceived credibility for fake news, while analytical reasoning was not associated with perceived credibility for real news. Furthermore, lower analytical reasoning was associated with greater accuracy for real (but not fake) news from credible compared to non-credible sources, with this effect only detected in Study 2. Conclusions: The novel findings generated in this research are discussed in light of classical vs. naturalistic accounts of decision-making as well as cognitive processes underlying news articles evaluation. The results extend previous findings that analytical reasoning contributes to fake news detection to full-length news articles. Furthermore, news-related cues such as the credibility of the source systematically affected discrimination ability between real and fake news.