Explore All Articles

We reviewed 555 papers published from 2016–2022 that presented misinformation to participants. We identified several trends in the literature—increasing frequency of misinformation studies over time, a wide variety of topics covered, and a significant focus on COVID-19 misinformation since 2020. We also identified several important shortcomings, including overrepresentation of samples from the United States and Europe and excessive emphasis on short-term consequences of brief, text-based misinformation.

Many observers of the current explosion of generative AI worry about its impact on our information environment, with concerns being raised about the increased quantity, quality, and personalization of misinformation. We assess these arguments with evidence from communication studies, cognitive science, and political science.

The proliferation of misinformation has prompted significant research efforts, leading to the development of a wide range of interventions. There is, however, insufficient guidance on how to evaluate these interventions. Here, we argue that researchers should consider not just the interventions’ primary effectiveness but also ancillary outcomes and implementation challenges.

We surveyed 150 academic experts on misinformation and identified areas of expert consensus. Experts defined misinformation as false and misleading information, though views diverged on the importance of intentionality and what exactly constitutes misinformation. The most popular reason why people believe and share misinformation was partisanship, while lack of education was one of the least popular reasons.

Who are mis-/disinformation studies for? What agenda does the field serve? How can it be improved? While the increase in the attention towards the topic in the last years is healthy, it has also led to an explosion of papers in all directions, and the field has been subject to various criticisms and attacks.

In this editorial, we share some of the journal’s key statistics for 2021, including acceptance rate, processing and publication times, and other useful data. 

By Natascha Chtena

Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University, USA

Image by Mohamed_hassan on Pixabay

In 2021, we received 109 submissions in total, which included 85 research articles, 18 commentaries, and 6 research notes.

Volume 1, Issue 8 Editorial

By Natascha Chtena

Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics, and Public Policy, Harvard University, USA

IMAGE BY Lindsay Henwood ON UNSPLASH

As we enter 2021, the HKS Misinformation Review completes its first year as a journal dedicated to publishing work of the highest quality from across the misinformation field on a compressed publication schedule.

Volume 1, Issue 6 Editorial

By Irene Pasquetto

Image by siora photography on unsplash

The title “All disinformation is local” was inspired by a tweet of Joan Donovan, on September 29th 2020

On September 1st, the leadership of the HKS Misinformation Review officially passed to Dr.

Volume 1, Issue 1 Editorial

By Irene Pasquetto

For the scope of this publication, we use the term “misinformation” to refer to all kinds of false or inaccurate information, independently from the fact that such information was deliberately created and spread to deceive.