How do we assess news credibility? Data analysis from 40 countries

illustration: DALL-E

A research team - Jan Pfänder from the Jean Nicod Institute in Paris and Sacha Altay from the University of Zurich - analyzed data from 67 experimental studies covering nearly 200,000 participants across 40 countries. Most were from the US and Europe, but the results also included data from Asia, Africa, and South America. Participants assessed the credibility of over two thousand news items - both true and false - previously verified by fact-checkers.

Pfänder and Altay published their findings in the article "Spotting false news and doubting true news" in Nature Human Behaviour. The result? In the vast majority of cases, people rated true news as more credible than false news. This effect was consistent regardless of country, headline format, or topic.

Key findings that confirm people’s ability to distinguish truth from falsehood:

• 298 out of 303 analyzed effects showed higher ratings for true information.
• 79.9% of participants had a positive "truth discernment" score.
• The average statistical effect (Cohen’s d = 1.12) is considered large in social sciences.

While concerns about disinformation remain, the researchers emphasize that most of us can distinguish between reliable and false information - at least when asked in an experimental setting.

More doubt toward truth than belief in falsehood

A more interesting and less intuitive result involves the so-called "skepticism bias" - the difference between mistakenly judging true information as false versus mistakenly accepting false information as credible.

Pfänder and Altay found that participants more often rejected true information than believed in false news. This effect was modest (Cohen’s d = 0.32) but consistently present across more than 200 analyzed cases.

Between the results list and the next section, it’s worth noting the context. The authors suggest that this skepticism may stem from how information is presented. Most experiments used Facebook-like layouts - headline, image, short description. According to Reuters Institute research, users trust such content less than news published on editorial websites.

Examples that amplify this effect:

• Headlines with images and leads triggered more skepticism than the same content in plain text.
• When participants saw politically incongruent news (e.g., a liberal article rated by a conservative), they judged it as less credible - regardless of its truth.

Polarization fuels skepticism more than gullibility

Especially interesting are the findings on so-called political congruence. Many studies presented participants with news that aligned or conflicted with their political views. The analysis showed that alignment didn’t affect truth detection - but incongruent news was met with more skepticism.

The table below shows skepticism levels depending on political congruence:

Type of news	Average skepticism level (Cohen’s d)
Aligned with beliefs	−0.20
Incongruent with beliefs	+0.58

The takeaway? Participants weren’t more likely to believe false news that aligned with their beliefs - but were significantly more skeptical of news that contradicted them.

This is a key insight for communication strategies. Instead of "preaching to the choir", it may be more effective to encourage openness toward information from across the divide.

The bigger problem: distrust in reliable sources

Paradoxically, the real problem isn’t too much trust in fake news - but declining trust in reliable information. As the authors note, since true news is far more common in our environment than falsehoods, rejecting them can have more damaging consequences than occasionally believing disinformation.

Data showing the scale of the issue:

• Only 59% of participants had a positive skepticism score (meaning they more accurately identified falsehoods than truths).
• 35% had a negative discernment score - judging truths as false and vice versa.
• In studies with raw data (over 42,000 participants), only 12% had extremely negative results.

The authors suggest rethinking how we approach educational interventions. Rather than just warning people about fake news, it may be more effective to encourage trust in credible sources. This paradigm shift could improve the quality of public discourse without fostering excessive suspicion.

A new approach to disinformation

Pfänder and Altay propose a new strategy for combating disinformation. Since most people can distinguish truth from falsehood, the issue is not a lack of skill but a lack of motivation to apply that skill.

They recommend changing the environments in which people consume news - e.g., through reminders to focus on credibility or by redesigning social media platforms. Instead of teaching how to spot fake news, we should encourage reflection and concentration.

This shift from education to motivation may turn out to be the most effective weapon in the fight for better information quality - and greater trust in the truth.

***

The study was conducted by Jan Pfänder (Institut Jean Nicod, École normale supérieure, École des hautes études en sciences sociales, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, Paris) and Sacha Altay (Department of Political Science, University of Zurich). The meta-analysis covered 303 effects from 67 experimental studies involving 194,438 participants from 40 countries. Full results are available at nature.com