Explore All Articles

The potential for harm entrenched in mis- and disinformation content, regardless of intentionality, opens space for a new analytical agenda to investigate the weaponization of identity-based features like gender, race, and ethnicity through the lens of violence. Therefore, we lay out the triangle of violence to support new studies aiming to investigate multimedia content, victims, and audiences of false claims.

This editorial provides an overview of the key statistics for Volume 5 (2024) of the HKS Misinformation Review, including submission and acceptance rates, accepted article types, publication speed and frequency, citation impact, most-viewed articles, engagement and readership, as well as author and reviewer demographics.

Recent instances of political violence have prompted concerns over the relationship between conspiracy theory beliefs and violence. Here, we examine the relationships between beliefs in various conspiracy theories and three operationalizations of violence—support for political violence, self-reported engagement in political violence, and engagement in non-political conflict.

Digital misinformation is rampant, and understanding how exposure to misinformation affects the perceptions and decision-making processes of adolescents is crucial. In a four-part qualitative study with 25 college students 18–19 years old, we found that participants first assess the severity of harms (e.g.,

The field of misinformation is facing several challenges, from attacks on academic freedom to polarizing discourse about the nature and extent of the problem for elections and digital well-being. However, we see this as an inflection point and an opportunity to chart a more informed and contextual research practice.

Observed corrections of misinformation on social media can encourage more accurate beliefs, but for these benefits to occur, corrections must happen. By exploring people’s perceptions of witnessing and performing corrections on social media, we find that many people say they observe and perform corrections across the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and France.

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.