Mit Fehlinformationen gewinnen: Neue Forschungsergebnisse stellen einen Zusammenhang zwischen der Unterstützung leicht zu widerlegender Behauptungen und der Priorisierung symbolischer Stärke fest
https://theconversation.com/winning-with-misinformation-new-research-identifies-link-between-endorsing-easily-disproven-claims-and-prioritizing-symbolic-strength-265652
2 Kommentare
>The research suggests that some people consider it [a “win” to lean in to known falsehoods](https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2025.2541206).
>During the pandemic, we surveyed 5,535 people across eight countries to investigate why people believed COVID-19 misinformation, like false claims that 5G networks cause the virus.
>The strongest predictor of whether someone believed in COVID-19-related misinformation and risks related to the vaccine was whether they viewed COVID-19 prevention efforts in terms of symbolic strength and weakness. In other words, this group focused on whether an action would make them appear to fend off or “give in” to untoward influence.
Direct link to the study:
* [Symbolic show of strength: a predictor of risk perception and belief in misinformation](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224545.2025.2541206) (Journal of Social Psychology)
>To some, measures to curb COVID-19 were reasonable and prudent; to others, they were unacceptable signs of losing a more symbolic battle. We propose that such symbolic thinking is key to how people perceive reality. We report three studies (total *N* = 5535 across eight countries, conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic) linking what we term Symbolic Show of Strength (SSS) in the context of COVID (SSS-COVID) with several important outcomes. Across countries, SSS-COVID was the strongest predictor of perception of COVID-19’s danger, attitudes toward vaccines, and belief in COVID-related misinformation in multiple regressions taking into a host of other reasoning and sociopolitical variables. In a fourth study (*N* = 430) we adapt the concept to attitudes toward cryptocurrency, with SSS-Crypto uniquely predicting perceived risk of cryptocurrency, general conspiracy beliefs, and preferences for autocratic government. Our results also suggest that SSS shapes perceptions of products, marketing ethics, and symbols more broadly.
Makes sense. „Symbolic“ strength is just that; a symbol. It evokes the *image* of strength by borrowing the authority (and therefore trustworthiness) of a society which has been built largely upon a dedication to the accurate reporting of basic facts.
We live in a society which is built upon intergenerational knowledge; what we learned a thousand years ago allowed us to figure things out 950 years ago, and what we learned then allowed us to figure things out 900 years ago and so on, all the way up to the present. But for this system to work **at all** there must be an unspoken rule that the information spread through society, and therefore to the next generation, must be relatively accurately reported. We, as humans, *rely on our inherent trust in one another to survive*.
Disinformation campaigns exploit this majestic history of thousands of years worth of relatively accurately reporting our findings about the world. They take the authority and trust built over those countless generations of human civilization and abuse it to fuel the greed of a few over the benefit of all.