In a world where misinformation spreads faster than fact, a new study is offering insight into why so many people fall for fake news, even when they suspect it’s false.
Researchers from Georgia State’s Robinson College of Business, Kennesaw State University, and the University of Tennessee have developed a model that explains how emotional cues, rather than accuracy, shape the way we consume and share news on social media.
The study, co-authored by Aaron French, Amrita George, Joshua Madden, and Veda C. Storey, appears in Information Systems Frontiers.
At the heart of the research is a simple question: Why do people believe and spread fake news, and do people consume fake news in the same way they consume tabloids?
Previous studies largely pointed to belief in fake news as confirmation bias, which is the tendency to believe information that supports your existing worldview. But this new study suggests something deeper is going on, especially during times of uncertainty like the COVID-19 pandemic.
“We found that people do consume fake news differently than tabloid news, which is largely consumed for entertainment and not taken seriously. With fake news, people are believing and sharing it because it feels useful either emotionally or informationally,” says Amrita George, co-author and clinical assistant professor of computer information systems(CIS) at Robinson.
In other words: fake news scratches an emotional itch. And in anxious, unstable times, that emotional itch is more powerful than truth.
For their study, the researchers defined fake news as news articles posing as legitimate news, but stemming from non-institutional journalistic sources that contain verifiably false information with the intention to deceive. To explore how people consume fake news, the researchers created the Content Dimensions–Overton Window–Perceived Utility or COP Model.
The model looks at three main factors in any piece of news:
- Veracity (how true it is)
- Emotional appeal (how it makes you feel)
- Relevance (how closely it connects to your life)
These factors shape how people judge whether a story is worth reading, liking, or sharing. Overlaying this is the Overton window, a political science concept that describes the range of ideas the public considers acceptable at a given time. If fake news falls within that window, or pushes its boundaries just enough, it’s more likely to be embraced.
To test their theory, the researchers analyzed more than 10,000 tweets about COVID-19. They looked at which tweets were “liked” and which were “ratioed” (received more negative comments than likes, signaling public disapproval). They also ran emotion and sentiment analyses to gauge tone, trust, and relevance.
“We found the Overton window plays a significant role in the response to fake news. It determined whether the fake news would be acceptable or unacceptable to people,” George says.
The researchers found people are highly sensitive to emotional tone, especially negative emotions like fear, anger, and disgust.
Even when a tweet was less truthful, if it hit the right emotional chord and felt relevant to a person’s life, it was more likely to be liked and shared. And interestingly, users were more forgiving of false information if the story felt emotionally satisfying. This tendency was much stronger with fake news than with traditional tabloid journalism, where readers typically know they’re not getting hard facts.
“A really interesting finding was that rather than providing information, fake news provided more emotional support in uncertain times, given we were analyzing fake news data from the COVID-19 pandemic,” says George.
This research lands at a critical moment. With AI-generated content flooding our feeds, understanding how and why fake news spreads is more urgent than ever.
The study offers practical insights. For example, the “ratio” of likes to replies on social media could help platforms flag potentially misleading or inflammatory content. Emotional tone, not just fact-checking, should be part of the detection process, according to the authors.
The findings also reinforce the importance of media literacy and the need to teach people not just how to spot falsehoods, but also how to recognize when their emotions are being manipulated.
Countries like Finland already include media literacy in school curricula starting in kindergarten. The researchers suggest similar programs could help inoculate the public against emotionally-driven misinformation.
Perhaps most importantly, the study shows how fake news can shift the boundaries of public discourse. When emotional stories are widely accepted, they slowly stretch the Overton Window, making extreme or previously unthinkable ideas feel normal.
“We’re not just talking about what people believe,” George says. “We’re talking about what becomes acceptable to believe. And that’s a much bigger deal.”
Source: Georgia State University
