A new study conducted by neuroscientists and political scientists at MIT and the University of California at Berkeley examines the factors that determine whether debunking efforts are successful in persuading individuals to change their beliefs about the legitimacy of an election. The study shows that debunking can be effective in certain circumstances, such as when individuals are less certain of their original beliefs or when they perceive the authority as unbiased or motivated by accuracy. Additionally, successful debunking can occur when an authority supports a result that contradicts their perceived bias, such as Fox News declaring Joseph R. Biden as the winner in Arizona during the 2020 U.S. presidential election.
The research team created a computational model based on Bayesian inference, which continuously updates predictions about people’s beliefs as they receive new information. This model treats debunking as an action that individuals undertake according to their own motivations and reasons. By observing an authority’s statements, individuals interpret why the person made those statements and may or may not change their beliefs about the election result based on their interpretation. Importantly, the model does not assume that any beliefs are necessarily incorrect or that any group is acting irrationally.
In various scenarios tested by the researchers, the model predicted that beliefs remained polarized in most cases, with some instances of further polarization. However, successful debunking resulted in belief convergence on an accepted outcome, particularly when individuals were uncertain about their initial beliefs. Furthermore, belief convergence was more likely when individuals perceived the authority as unbiased and highly motivated by accuracy. For instance, Republican governors stating that elections in their states were fair even when the Democratic candidate won could be seen as more persuasive due to the perceived lack of bias.
As the 2024 presidential election approaches, efforts are being made to train nonpartisan election observers who can validate the legitimacy of an election. These independent entities may play a crucial role in swaying individuals who have doubts about the election’s legitimacy, especially if they are perceived as unbiased and committed to the truth of the outcome. The research suggests that in a climate of uncertainty, voices that are independent and truthful have the potential to guide individuals towards an accurate outcome.
Funded in part by the Patrick J. McGovern Foundation and the Guggenheim Foundation, the study sheds light on the complexities of debunking efforts in influencing people’s beliefs about the legitimacy of an election. By understanding the factors that contribute to successful debunking, policymakers and organizations can better navigate contentious election situations and work towards building consensus among the public. With the upcoming presidential election, the findings offer valuable insights into how debunking efforts can be strategically employed to foster greater acceptance of election outcomes and reduce polarization within society.
