Insufficient truths

<Image Source=http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/files/2011/04/truth_425x320.jpg>

The other day, I was chatting with a friend of mine about conspiracy theories. I have heard some of the more popular theories - the Apollo moon landing was faked, Elvis is still alive, about 100 different ones involving the Kennedy assassination - but the theories he was showing me were definitely new to me, and they were quite. . .creative. Most conspiracy theories are accepted by a small group of people and are often dismissed, yet amongst their followers, the theories thrive, even in the face of counterfactual evidence. This tendency to cling false belief, termed motivated reasoning, is an interesting quirk of human psychology and many movements with significant followings have, in a sense, owed their existence to it.One example in Korea that springs to mind was the incident in the summer of 2010 involving the Epik High singer Tablo and the group타진요. Born Daniel Armand Lee/이선웅, Tablo was at the center of a controversy involving his educational background.  He went to Stanford University, where he obtained his B.A. in English and his M.A. in Creative Writing in 3 and a half years. Many did not believe he was capable of such a feat, accused him of lying about his education and created online communities demanding he come clean. As the demands became more vocal and personal threats began to surface, Tablo decided to act. He released his official transcripts and an official statement from Stanford University confirming his academic record and good standing. Despite this, the skepticism continued and even escalated (look here for a bit more on what happened).

Vaccines have come under similar assault in many countries. Opponents of vaccines have long touted the dangers that accompany vaccination. One commonly cited risk is autism, with mechanisms including vaccine overload and thiomersal being implicated as causes. In 1998, Andrew Wakefield, a former surgeon and medical researcher in the UK, published a paper in The Lancet linking the MMR vaccine to autism. The story gained traction, and confidence in the MMR vaccine, along with vaccination rates dropped, with a coincident increase in the number of cases of measles and mumps.  The medical community, in an effort to alleviate fears about vaccination, has conducted multiple studies which have found no link between vaccination and autism (and in 2010, The Lancet retracted Andrew Wakefield's 1998 paper and the UK General Medical Council found him guilty of professional misconduct). Again, despite evidence contrary to their beliefs, the anti-vaccine movement is still going strong.

There is concern that misinformation about the safety of vaccines may lead to vaccination rates dropping below levels that will confer herd immunity to the general populace and, as a result, the resurgence of diseases that had previously been well controlled. Combating this misinformation, however, may not be as simple as it seems. In the two cases above, people failed to change their beliefs even when presented with evidence showing them to be false.

Worse yet, a paper by two political scientists, Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler, shows that sometimes, refutations worsen misinformation. In one of their studies, volunteers were presented with mock news articles, half of which contained a statement implying there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the United States declared war (the control).  The other half of the articles also contained a statement refuting the claim, citing a report which concluded there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq (the intervention). The participants were asked to identify their political ideology and then asked if they agreed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Nyhan and Reifler looked at the results, separating them by political ideology. In the control case, as expected, conservatives were more likely to agree than non-conservatives (32% vs. 22%). In the intervention group, the refuting statement had the expected effect among non-conservatives, lowering the percentage who agreed there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to 13%, however, among conservatives, it had the opposite effect, increasing the percentage who agreed to 64%.  In other words, conservatives who were given evidence correcting the false statement became MORE misinformed.

It may seem irrational, but I would wager everyone engages in motivated reasoning. I know I am more accepting of evidence that supports my views but suspicious of any that opposes them.  As communicators, we must learn to deal with this problem and realize that sometimes, just stating the truth is insufficient. Beyond that, patience, persistence, and a properly crafted message are all crucial in combating misinformation.