[screen 1]
“How could anyone believe that?” we ask when seeing people accept obvious disinformation. But believing false information isn’t about intelligence - it’s about how human brains work.
We all have cognitive biases: mental shortcuts that usually help us but can lead us astray. Understanding these biases is essential for understanding disinformation vulnerability - including our own.
[screen 2]
The Cognitive Miser Model
Humans conserve mental energy:
Reality: Our brains face overwhelming information
Response: Mental shortcuts (heuristics) for efficiency
- Quick judgments without deep analysis
- “Good enough” answers, not perfect
- Automatic processing over deliberate
Usually helpful: Shortcuts enable fast decisions
Problem: Shortcuts can be exploited
Implication: Disinformation works because it exploits how we normally think
Everyone: Even smart, educated people use shortcuts
Not stupidity - efficiency with vulnerabilities.
[screen 3]
Confirmation Bias
We seek information confirming existing beliefs:
Definition: Tendency to search for, interpret, and recall information that confirms beliefs
Mechanisms:
- Selective attention: Notice confirming evidence
- Selective interpretation: Interpret ambiguity favorably
- Selective recall: Remember confirming information
Example: If you believe X, you’ll notice evidence supporting X and ignore evidence against
Why it exists: Maintaining consistent worldview is cognitively easier
Disinformation exploitation: False claims confirming beliefs spread faster than corrections
One of most powerful and pervasive biases.
[screen 4]
Motivated Reasoning
We reason to reach desired conclusions:
Definition: Goal-directed reasoning where the goal is reaching preferred conclusion
Process:
- Desired conclusion exists
- Search for evidence supporting it
- Uncritically accept supporting evidence
- Critically scrutinize contradicting evidence
- Conclude what you wanted
Differs from confirmation bias: More active, goal-directed
Identity-protective cognition: Motivated reasoning to protect group identity
Example: Evaluating same evidence differently based on whether it supports your political team
Implication: Facts alone won’t change minds when identity at stake
[screen 5]
The Illusory Truth Effect
Repetition increases belief:
Finding: Repeated statements rated as more truthful than new ones
Mechanism: Familiarity confused with truth
- Familiar feels easier to process
- Processing fluency interpreted as truth
Disturbing: Works even when:
- People know statement is false
- Statement contradicts knowledge
- Source is unreliable
Disinformation exploitation: Repeat lies until they feel true
Defense: Awareness helps but doesn’t eliminate effect
Why disinformation campaigns repeat same false claims.
[screen 6]
Availability Heuristic
We judge probability by what easily comes to mind:
Definition: Estimating likelihood based on mental availability of examples
Examples:
- Overestimating terrorism risk after news coverage
- Fearing plane crashes more than car accidents
- Believing crime increasing when coverage increases
Why it exists: Often what’s easily recalled is actually common
Problem: Vivid, emotional, recent events more available than common but mundane
Disinformation exploitation: Dramatic false stories create inflated threat perceptions
“If I can think of examples, it must be common.”
[screen 7]
The Backfire Effect
Corrections can strengthen false beliefs:
Definition: Correcting misinformation sometimes increases belief
Mechanism:
- Correction perceived as threat to identity
- Defensive processing activated
- Counter-arguments generated
- Belief strengthened
Contested: Recent research suggests less common than initially thought
When it occurs: Identity-central beliefs, distrusted sources
Implication: Simply stating facts can backfire
Solution approaches: Affirmation before correction, trusted messengers
Why “just correct it” doesn’t work.
[screen 8]
Source Confusion
We remember claims but forget context:
Sleeper effect: Over time, message persuasiveness increases as source forgotten
Mechanism:
- Remember the claim
- Forget it was debunked
- Forget source was unreliable
- Claim feels true
Implication: Debunking has limited durability
Example: Remember seeing claim about vaccines, forget it was fact-check showing it false
Why repeating false claim to debunk is risky: Amplifies claim, contributes to confusion
[screen 9]
Dunning-Kruger Effect
Incompetence includes not recognizing incompetence:
Finding: People with low expertise overestimate their knowledge
Mechanism: Lacking knowledge to recognize gaps
Curve:
- Low knowledge = high confidence
- Increasing knowledge = decreasing confidence (see complexity)
- High knowledge = appropriate confidence
Disinformation relevance: People confident in false beliefs may lack knowledge to recognize falsity
Everyone vulnerable: Experts in one domain can be overconfident in another
“I did my own research” - without expertise to evaluate it.
[screen 10]
Proportionality Bias
Big events must have big causes:
Definition: Expecting event magnitude to match cause magnitude
Rejection of randomness: Hard to accept chance or small causes for major events
Example: Conspiracy theories about assassinations, pandemics, terrorist attacks
- “A lone gunman couldn’t possibly…”
- “There must be powerful forces behind this…”
Why: Desire for world to make sense; big events should have big explanations
Disinformation exploitation: Conspiracy theories offer proportional explanations for major events
[screen 11]
Continued Influence Effect
Misinformation influences beliefs even after correction:
Finding: False information continues shaping thinking after learning it’s false
Mechanism:
- Information integrated into mental model
- Removing it leaves explanatory gap
- Gap uncomfortable, so information persists
Example: Believing WMDs in Iraq even after learning intelligence was wrong
Implication: First impression matters enormously
Solution: Provide alternative explanation when debunking
Why rapid correction important, and why correction isn’t enough.
[screen 12]
Social Proof
We follow what others do:
Definition: Looking to others’ behavior to determine correct action
Usually helpful: Crowd wisdom often accurate
Vulnerability: Can be manipulated
- Fake accounts creating false consensus
- Bot amplification of fringe views
- Coordinated inauthentic behavior
Mechanism: “If everyone believes this, it must be true”
Disinformation exploitation: Creating illusion of consensus
Why FIMI operations use bot networks.
[screen 13]
Group Identity and Belief
Beliefs signal belonging:
Expressive function: Beliefs as identity markers
- Not about truth, about belonging
- “People like us believe this”
- Dissent risks exclusion
Identity-protective cognition: Protecting group identity over individual accuracy
Implication: Correcting false belief perceived as attacking identity
Political tribalism: Partisan identity drives belief more than evidence
Example: Same claim believed or rejected based on partisan source
Why polarization makes disinformation harder to counter.
[screen 14]
The Role of Emotion
Feelings shape belief:
Affect heuristic: Feeling influences judgment
- Positive feeling = low risk, high benefit judgment
- Negative feeling = high risk, low benefit judgment
Emotional content advantages:
- More attention
- Better memory
- Wider sharing
- Bypasses critical thinking
Fear and anger: Particularly powerful
- Amplify sharing
- Reduce deliberation
- Increase susceptibility
Disinformation pattern: Emotionally charged false claims
Not rational actors - emotional beings.
[screen 15]
System 1 vs. System 2 Thinking
Two modes of thought:
System 1 (fast, automatic):
- Intuitive
- Effortless
- Emotional
- Stereotyping
- Heuristic-based
System 2 (slow, deliberate):
- Logical
- Effortful
- Analytical
- Critical
- Evidence-based
Default: System 1 (easier)
Vulnerability: Disinformation designed for System 1
- Quick, emotional judgments
- No deep analysis
Defense: Activate System 2
- Pause before sharing
- Critical evaluation
- Fact-checking
[screen 16]
Cognitive Load and Vulnerability
Mental exhaustion increases susceptibility:
Cognitive load: Mental effort being used
Finding: High cognitive load increases vulnerability
- Less mental resources for critical evaluation
- More reliance on shortcuts
- Easier to manipulate
Modern life: Constant cognitive load
- Information overload
- Decision fatigue
- Stress and distraction
Implication: Tired, stressed, overwhelmed people more vulnerable
Strategy: Disinformation often exploits moments of crisis when load is highest
[screen 17]
Who Is Most Vulnerable?
Universal vulnerability with variation:
Not just the “gullible”: Everyone vulnerable to some disinformation
Risk factors:
- Strong prior beliefs (confirmation bias)
- Low trust in institutions (alternative sources)
- High cognitive load (less critical evaluation)
- Strong group identity (identity-protective cognition)
- Age extremes (digital literacy, cognitive changes)
- Isolation (no corrective input)
Education: Not protective as expected
- Educated people can be better at rationalizing
- Motivated reasoning works regardless of intelligence
Context matters: Same person vulnerable in some contexts, not others
[screen 18]
Building Resilience
Understanding biases is first step:
Individual strategies:
- Awareness of own biases
- Slow down, activate System 2
- Seek disconfirming evidence
- Consider alternative explanations
- Check sources
- Notice emotional manipulation
Social strategies:
- Diverse social networks
- Trusted correctors
- Open discussion norms
Structural strategies:
- Media literacy education
- Platform design for deliberation
- Information environment quality
Reality: Can’t eliminate biases, but can recognize and compensate
Humility: Recognize everyone is vulnerable, including you
Understanding why people believe disinformation - including ourselves - is essential for effective counter-messaging. Not “those foolish people” but “we humans with predictable vulnerabilities.” Empathy and understanding enable better responses than condemnation.