Political Fact Checking: Databases & Articles

Recent research has extended the belief-perseverance paradigm to the political realm, showing that negative information about political figures has a persistent effect on political opinions even after it has been discredited. However, little is known about the effects of false positive information about political figures. In three experiments, we find that discrediting positive information generates a 'punishment effect' that is inconsistent with the previous literature on belief perseverance. We argue people attempt to adjust for the perceived influence of the false claim when the information is discredited. In this case, when trying to account for the effects of discredited positive information about a politician, people overestimate how much correction is needed and thus end up with a more negative opinion. (By contrast, people underestimate how much correction is needed to adjust for false negative information, leading to belief perseverance.) These results suggest that bogus credit claiming or other positive misinformation can have severe repercussions for politicians.

The fact-checking of political campaigns has been on the rise since the early years of the 2000s when news organizations failed to vet the George W. Bush administration's evidence for the Iraq War properly. In response, a number of fact-checking organizations have been created to rate the accuracy of campaign statements and political ads. However, a number of political campaigns have ignored the claims of fact-checkers and have continued to put out exaggerated attack ads and make false campaign statements. For these politicians, lying can still land a significant blow and damage an opponent - even if they take a hit themselves.