No abstract

Media‐based fact checking contributes to more accurate political knowledge, but its corrective effects are limited. We argue that biographical information included in a corrective message, which is often unrelated to the inaccurate claim itself, can activate misperception‐congruent naïve theories, increasing confidence in a misperception's plausibility and inducing skepticism toward denials. Resistance to corrections occurs regardless of initial belief accuracy, but the effect is strongest among those who find the contextual information objectionable or threatening. We test these claims using an online survey‐embedded experiment (N = 750) conducted in the wake of the controversy over the proposed Islamic cultural center in New York City near the site of the 9/11 attacks, and find support for our predictions. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

Politically motivated selective exposure has traditionally been understood through the lens of long‐standing attitudes and beliefs, but the role of environment in shaping information exposure practices merits further consideration. Citizens might respond to the political environment in their information‐seeking behavior for numerous reasons. Citizens who believe their position is politically vulnerable have specific cognitive and affective needs that may make them uniquely attuned to counterattitudinal information. In the context of a presidential election, this means that as the defeat of a supported candidate appears more likely, attention to counterattitudinal content will increase. Data collected in the 2008 and 2012 U.S. Presidential elections support this prediction, although this relationship was observed primarily among supporters of the Republican candidate in both elections.

Social relationships have far-reaching effects on both the mental and physical health of individuals and, consequently, the larger communities in which they live. Deteriorating social networks reflect rising alienation and social isolation, and in extreme cases, can result in death. Using changes in mortality rates, measures of social capital, and key demographic and economic factors we show that per capita deaths from alcohol or suicide, as well as an overall decline in social capital, strongly predict support for populist candidates Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders in the United States 2016 presidential election and primaries. These results suggest that healthy social relationships and networks underpin trust in politicians and government, and that their deterioration may result in popular outrage against ‘elites’.

No abstract