Fake news and its electoral consequences: a survey experiment on Mexico

AI and Society:1-14 (forthcoming)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This study examined the effect of fake news on electoral outcome. Using post-election surveys, previous studies found associations between exposure to fake news and voting behavior, though these observational studies failed to show that these changes were actually caused by fake news. To examine whether fake news really affects voting behavior, we need to experimentally manipulate voters’ exposure to fake news in real elections and see if voters regret their vote choice knowing that the information was false. For this purpose, our study focused on Mexico’s 2018 presidential election, which provided an ideal setting. During the campaign, false information about a scandal allegedly involving Ricardo Anaya, a candidate from the National Action Party, was widely disseminated. However, his innocence was officially acknowledged after the election. Using this correction of fake news as a treatment, we tested a sample of 1,561 individuals to assess whether the retraction of fake news caused post-election regret: would Mexican voters have voted differently if they had not been exposed to such false information. Our multivariate analyses found that the retraction of fake news did cause post-election regret among voters with lower internal political efficacy, but voters associated with higher political knowledge and internal political efficacy were not affected by the retraction and were less likely to experience regret. About 20% of the respondents experienced post-election regret, and of those, about 35% would have switched their vote to Anaya. The findings corroborate lasting effects of fake news, which may have non-negligible effects on electoral outcomes.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,423

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is fake news?M. R. X. Dentith - 2018 - University of Bucharest Review (2):24-34.
What is fake news?Romy Jaster & David Lanius - 2018 - Versus 2 (127):207-227.
Defining Fake News.Glenn Https://Orcidorg Anderau - 2021 - Kriterion – Journal of Philosophy 35 (3):197-215.
Fake News: A Definition.Axel Gelfert - 2018 - Informal Logic 38 (1):84-117.
Speaking of Fake News: Definitions and Dimensions.Romy Jaster & David Lanius - 2021 - In Sven Bernecker, Amy K. Flowerree & Thomas Grundmann (eds.), The Epistemology of Fake News. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. pp. 19-45.
Why we should keep talking about fake news.Jessica Pepp, Eliot Michaelson & Rachel Sterken - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 65 (4):471-487.
The Problem of Fake News.M. R. X. Dentith - 2016 - Public Reason 8 (1-2):65-79.
Fake news. A continuation or rejection of the traditional news paradigm?Marek Palczewski - 2017 - Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Litteraria Polonica 43 (5):23-34.
Free Speech and the Legal Prohibition of Fake News.Étienne Brown - 2023 - Social Theory and Practice 49 (1):29-55.
Pragmatist Media Ethics and the Challenges of Fake News.Scott R. Stroud - 2019 - Journal of Media Ethics 34 (4):178-192.
Stop Talking about Fake News!Joshua Habgood-Coote - 2019 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 62 (9-10):1033-1065.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-07-25

Downloads
21 (#720,615)

6 months
8 (#347,798)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations