Why Misinformation Must Not Be Ignored Pubmed

Bonisiwe Shabane

-Dec 5, 2025, 4:38 PM

why misinformation must not be ignored pubmed

Recent academic debate has seen the emergence of the claim that misinformation is not a significant societal problem. We argue that the arguments used to support this minimizing position are flawed, particularly if interpreted (e.g., by policymakers or the public) as suggesting that misinformation can be safely ignored. Here, we rebut the two main claims, namely that misinformation is not of substantive concern (a) due to its low incidence and (b) because it has no causal influence on notable political or behavioral... Through a critical review of the current literature, we demonstrate that (a) the prevalence of misinformation is nonnegligible if reasonably inclusive definitions are applied and that (b) misinformation has causal impacts on important beliefs... Both scholars and policymakers should therefore continue to take misinformation seriously. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

Ullrich K H Ecker*, Li Qian Tay, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander Van Der Linden, John Cook, Naomi Oreskes, Stephan Lewandowsky Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review T1 - Why Misinformation Must Not Be Ignored N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2024 The Author(s) Ullrich K.

H. Ecker, Li Qian Tay, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander van der Linden, John Cook, Naomi Oreskes, Stephan Lewandowsky Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review T1 - Why Misinformation Must Not Be Ignored N2 - Recent academic debate has seen the emergence of the claim that misinformation is not a significant societal problem.

We argue that the arguments used to support this minimizing position are flawed, particularly if interpreted (e.g., by policymakers or the public) as suggesting that misinformation can be safely ignored. Here, we rebut the two main claims, namely that misinformation is not of substantive concern (a) due to its low incidence and (b) because it has no causal influence on notable political or behavioral... Through a critical review of the current literature, we demonstrate that (a) the prevalence of misinformation is nonnegligible if reasonably inclusive definitions are applied and that (b) misinformation has causal impacts on important beliefs... Both scholars and policymakers should therefore continue to take misinformation seriously. Public Significance Statement This article refutes claims that misinformation is an insignificant issue. Through a critical literature review, we demonstrate that misinformation represents a nontrivial part of the information environment and can causally and adversely influence people's beliefs, decisions, and behaviors.

We clarify through our discussion why misinformation continues to be a significant problem that should not be ignored by communicators and policymakers. American Psychologist, Vol 80(6), Sep 2025, 867-878; doi:10.1037/amp0001448 Recent academic debate has seen the emergence of the claim that misinformation is not a significant societal problem. We argue that the arguments used to support this minimizing position are flawed, particularly if interpreted (e.g., by policymakers or the public) as suggesting that misinformation can be safely ignored. Here, we rebut the two main claims, namely that misinformation is not of substantive concern (a) due to its low incidence and (b) because it has no causal influence on notable political or behavioral... Through a critical review of the current literature, we demonstrate that (a) the prevalence of misinformation is nonnegligible if reasonably inclusive definitions are applied and that (b) misinformation has causal impacts on important beliefs...

Both scholars and policymakers should therefore continue to take misinformation seriously. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved) The concept of misinformation has recently been subject to a range of theoretical and methodological critiques. Sander van der Linden, Ullrich Ecker and Stephan Lewandowsky argue misinformation has clear and measurable effects and that downplaying them risks compromising fact based public dialogue. A flurry of recent opinion pieces downplay the problem of misinformation in society. Whether it is de-emphasising the role of misinformation in fuelling violence, dismissing the threat of digital technologies in spreading misinformation, or claiming that disinformation is largely a distraction from more important underlying issues.

What these pieces have in common are (mis)perceptions of misinformation’s role in causing social ills, its prevalence, impact on behaviour, and epistemic status. In our recent work we have tried to set the record straight and outline why these one-sided arguments can lack nuance and are at times flat out wrong. At worst they may even unintentionally provide intellectual cover for the current witch hunt on misinformation researchers. Here we take up each of these critiques in turn. It’s important to understand that misinformation can have both direct and indirect impacts, which add up to the total impact of misinformation. Think of the 2024 UK riots, which were initiated directly by a false story on social media.

The people involved also likely already held strong anti-immigration and anti-Muslim views, making them susceptible to this kind of misinformation in the first place. The reasons why people hold these views are complex, but it is difficult to ignore that these too are most likely shaped by misinformation (see for example, in a different context the long history... Misinformation can thus also contribute indirectly by shaping public opinion.

Why Misinformation Must Not Be Ignored Pubmed

People Also Search

Recent Academic Debate Has Seen The Emergence Of The Claim

Ullrich K H Ecker*, Li Qian Tay, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander

H. Ecker, Li Qian Tay, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander Van Der

We Argue That The Arguments Used To Support This Minimizing

We Clarify Through Our Discussion Why Misinformation Continues To Be