Welcome to Misinformation Mondays: a 5-part series where we delve into strategies that researchers can use to combat misinformation. Across the series we’ll be sharing resources to help you fight mis- and disinformation online and in your communities.
This week's topic: consistency and repetition
Like last week’s topic, availability, this week’s strategy is another one that is largely self-explanatory, but effective when used correctly.
Consistency is key for allowing people to follow the thread of research, understand where information is coming from, and learn how researchers arrive at scientific findings. Seeing information repeated multiple times, and especially across multiple sources, can increase that information’s perceived validity. On the flipside, if something that was once thought to be true is later disproven by research, it’s a good practice to explain why, and clearly link new research to the previous findings.
A common refrain from the more scientifically skeptical is that science seems to move too fast. When people feel left out of the conversation or can’t follow a clear path as to how ideas and inventions come about, it can lead to more skepticism. Consistent, regular communication – combined with other tips we’ve already shared – can help to bridge the gap.
What is it?
Research suggests that people are more likely to believe information when they see it repeated consistently over time and across different channels. This is a significant issue with online misinformation, due to the speed and ease with which misinformation can be generated, and social media algorithms that tend to feed a user similar or repeated information that supports and validates that user’s tastes and opinions.
This repetition can happen unintentionally as well. This is why it’s important to be mindful that we’re not unnecessarily repeating misinformation for the purposes of debunking. Re-sharing misinformation, even with a fact-check attached, can backfire when people perceive this as the misinformation being repeated. Consider whether people need to see the related misinformation for your correction to have impact. In most cases, they probably don’t.
The good news is that the strategy of repetition can be just as effective for spreading factual information.
How do you do it?
Social media makes repetition easy. Most platforms have functions that allow for re-sharing and re-posting content from other accounts. This kind of cross-posting can be very helpful for repeating and reinforcing factual information. For example, if you post some research that illuminates the benefits of gender-affirming care, a research centre, hospital, or physician on the same platform can easily share that story with a couple of clicks and help more people see it. If, a week later, you see someone else independently sharing similar research findings, reposting (ideally with permission) is a great way to reinforce both your original findings, and the other researcher’s findings – simultaneously building on the validity of both pieces of research, and introducing your audience to a broader network of people who share the same trust in legitimate science.
One important thing to note is that belief in a fact doesn’t necessarily continue to increase the more times one sees the fact repeated. Belief usually increases the most when a person views the information a second time, and increases in belief become incrementally smaller after further repetitions. Additional repetition doesn’t appear to harm belief in the information, but it’s not necessary to repeat something more than two or three times to get the desired effect.
Further reading
Countering Online Misinformation Resource Pack | UNICEF Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia
The effects of repetition frequency on the illusory truth effect | NIH