The tendency to believe false information after it has been repeated (i.e., the illusory truth effect, ITE) occurs because repetition facilitates processing. In today’s globalized world, individuals consume information in multiple languages. Yet, studies on the ITE have predominantly included monolinguals. The present study examined how the ITE unfolds across languages and time in Arabic-English bilinguals. Participants rated the truthfulness of new and repeated accurate and inaccurate trivia statements in their native language Arabic, second language English, or both languages, by switching languages after their initial exposure to the statements (English to Arabic or Arabic to English). Linear mixed effects models revealed that bilinguals’ ITEs weakened over time for statements initially presented in their second language, suggesting that use of a second language can reduce one’s susceptibility to the ITE and misinformation. This work provides practical implications for addressing the spread of misinformation in an increasingly globalized, multilingual digital landscape.

In this study we test the idea that people who believe such claims possess a generally lazy thinking style (Miserly Hypothesis) by examining whether non-believers struggle more than believers when analysing detail-rich evidence under time constraints (relative to unlimited time). Using a 2 (Misinformation Group; believer vs. non-believer) x 2 (Evidence Quality; high vs low) x 2 (Time: Untimed vs. Timed) quasi-experimental between subjects design we examined whether time pressure reduced sensitivity to evidence quality (i.e. differences in the perceived persuasiveness of high- versus low-quality evidence) more for non-believers than for believers. A three-way ANOVA revealed little evidence to support the Miserly Hypothesis; n = 200 believers and n = 174 non-believers recruited from Prolific did not differ in their sensitivity to evidence quality. Both groups were negatively affected by time constraints. Our findings challenge the notion that believing improbable claims is rooted in a lack of analytical thinking.

In this presentation, we will discuss the ‘hyper-systemising hypothesis’ - how people with higher autistic traits seem to be prone to particular challenges when engaging with namely conspiracy theories and misinformation. Over a series of publications, we explored how people who are more prone to hyper-systematic thinking may also be prone to certain cognitive biases that lead to issues related to social media use. I will discuss the overall findings of our research within the Autism Initiative at Flinders University in this area, and what this research means for the broader misinformation field and for future research.

People are exposed to misinformation about dieting practices every day on social media. While misinformation research has largely focused on vulnerabilities to misinformation and strategies to counteract its spread, limited work has examined how specific harmful content, such as dietary misinformation (DM), influences vulnerable groups, particularly those at risk of eating disorders (EDs). People with elevated eating disorder pathology such as body image concerns demonstrate greater attentional bias to dietary information and greater susceptibility to unhealthy dieting behaviours (e.g., fasting and other forms of caloric restriction). In this presentation we will present a series of papers to which we explored the role of cognitive bias, eating disorder risk, and misinformation susceptibility, as well as diet-specific misinformation susceptibility. The findings suggest that participants who score highly on weight concern or are potentially at risk for an ED emphasize a growing concern about managing misinformation, particularly in vulnerable groups.