IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jacres/doi10.1086-711730.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Truth Distortion: A Process to Explain Polarization over Unsubstantiated Claims Related to COVID-19

Author

Listed:
  • Anne-Sophie Chaxel
  • Sandra Laporte

Abstract

Knowing what to believe in the context of COVID-19 is challenging. Conflicting narratives from an array of prominent sources make distinguishing what is true and false difficult. This research examines how a preference for a source of information influences one’s truth judgments about controversial COVID-related statements. An early positive or negative evaluation of a public figure causes individuals to distort their truth judgments in the same direction as their preference. Interestingly, this truth distortion tends to increase linearly with a series of repeated controversial statements. Namely, most people tend to maintain their early preference and increasingly distort their evaluation of truth to make it fit the narrative of the source. Overall, this research provides insights into the process by which polarization occurs; that is, it demonstrates how people come to strongly believe in unsubstantiated claims over time, while others come to strongly reject the same information.

Suggested Citation

  • Anne-Sophie Chaxel & Sandra Laporte, 2021. "Truth Distortion: A Process to Explain Polarization over Unsubstantiated Claims Related to COVID-19," Journal of the Association for Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 6(1), pages 196-203.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/711730
    DOI: 10.1086/711730
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/711730
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/711730
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/711730?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jacres:doi:10.1086/711730. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JACR .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.