Learning in a Post-Truth World

References

• Abramowitz AI (2010) The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Acemoglu D, Bimpikis K, Ozdaglar A (2014) Dynamics of information exchange in endogenous social networks. Theoretical Econom. 9:41–97.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acemoglu D, Chernozhukov V, Yildiz M (2016) Fragility of asymptotic agreement under bayesian learning. Theoretical Econom. 11(1):187–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Acemoglu D, Ozdaglar A, Siderius J (2022) A model of online misinformation. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Acemoglu D, Dahleh MA, Lobel I, Ozdaglar A (2011) Bayesian learning in social networks. Rev. Econom. Stud. 78(4):1201–1236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alesina A, Miano A, Stantcheva S (2020) The polarization of reality. AEA Papers Proc. 110:324–328.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allcott H, Gentzkow M (2017) Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. J. Econom. Perspect. 31(2):211–236.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bago B, Rand DG, Pennycook G (2020) Fake news, fast and slow: Deliberation reduces belief in false (but not true) news headlines. J. Experiment. Psych. General 149(8):1608–1613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Broniatowski DA, Jamison AM, Qi S, AlKulaib L, Chen T, Benton A, Quinn SC, Dredze M (2018) Weaponized health communication: Twitter bots and Russian trolls amplify the vaccine debate. Amer. J. Public Health 108:1378–1384.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bronstein MV, Pennycook G, Bear A, Rand DG, Cannon TD (2019) Belief in fake news is associated with delusionality, dogmatism, religious fundamentalism, and reduced analytic thinking. J. Appl. Res. Memory Cognition 8(1):108–117.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bursztyn L, Rao A, Roth CP, Yanagizawa-Drott DH (2020) Misinformation during a pandemic. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Candogan O, Drakopoulos K (2020) Optimal signaling of content accuracy: Engagement vs. misinformation. Oper. Res. 68(2):497–515.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Dasaratha K, Golub B, Hak N (2020) Learning from neighbors about a changing state. Preprint, submitted January 10, 2018, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3097505.Google Scholar
• Drummond C, Fischhoff B (2017) Individuals with greater science literacy and education have more polarized beliefs on controversial science topics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(36):9587–9592.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fisher M, Cox JW, Hermann P (2016) Pizzagate: From rumor, to hashtag, to gunfire in DC. Washington Post. (December 6). https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pizzagate-from-rumor-to-hashtag-to-gunfire-in-dc/2016/12/06/4c7def50-bbd4-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html.Google Scholar
• Golub B, Jackson MO (2010) Naive learning in social networks and the wisdom of crowds. Amer. Econom. J. Microeconomics 2(1):112–149.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hamilton LC, Hartter J, Saito K (2015) Trust in scientists on climate change and vaccines. SAGE Open 5: 1–13.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jadbabaie A, Molavi P, Sandroni A, Tahbaz-Salehi A (2012) Non-Bayesian social learning. Games Econom. Behav. 76(1):210–225.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahan DM, Peters E, Dawson EC, Slovic P (2017) Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Behav. Public Policy 1(1):54–86.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahan DM, Peters E, Wittlin M, Slovic P, Ouellette LL, Braman D, Mandel G (2012) The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change 2:732–735.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Loomba S, de Figueiredo A, Piatek SJ, de Graaf K, Larson HJ (2021) Measuring the impact of covid-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behav. 5:337–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• McIntyre L (2018) Post-Truth (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mostagir M, Siderius J (2022) Social inequality and the spread of misinformation. Management Sci. Forthcoming.Link, Google Scholar
• Mostagir M, Ozdaglar A, Siderius J (2022) When is society susceptible to manipulation? Management Sci., ePub ahead of print January 21, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.4265.Link, Google Scholar
• Osmundsen M, Bor A, Vahlstrup PB, Bechmann A, Petersen MB(2020) Partisan polarization is the primary psychological motivation behind “fake news” sharing on Twitter. Amer. Political Sci. Rev. 115(3):999–1015.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Papanastasiou Y (2020) Fake news propagation and detection: A sequential model. Management Sci. 66(5):1826–1846.Link, Google Scholar
• Pennycook G, Rand DG (2018) Lazy, not biased: Susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition 188:39–50.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pennycook G, Epstein Z, Mosleh M, Arechar AA, Eckles D, Rand DG (2021) Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online. Nature 592:590–595.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pew Research Center (2014) Political polarization in the American public. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/.Google Scholar
• Taber CS, Lodge M (2006) Motivated skepticism in the evaluation of political beliefs. Amer. J. Political Sci. 50(3):755–769.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taber CS, Cann D, Kucsova S (2009) The motivated processing of political arguments. Political Behav. 31(2):137–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tappin BM, Pennycook G, Rand DG (2020) Bayesian or biased? Analytic thinking and political belief updating. Cognition 204:104375.Crossref, Google Scholar
• van der Linden S, Panagopoulos C, Roozenbeek J (2020) You are fake news: Political bias in perceptions of fake news. Media Culture Soc. 42(3):460–470.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watts DJ, Rothschild DM, Mobius M (2021) Measuring the news and its impact on democracy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 118(15):e1912443118.Crossref, Google Scholar