Today we take a look at a new study on how truths and misinformation are received by the public:
“Truth Over Falsehood: Experimental Evidence on What Persuades and Spreads”, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2026.1
Study Summary
The study investigates a classic philosophical debate: whether truth naturally triumphs over falsehood in a “marketplace of ideas,” as John Milton explored (e.g. “A Letter Concerning Toleration”), or whether the rapid spread of online misinformation suggests the opposite.
To test this, the researchers conducted four experiments with 4,607 participants, comparing messages generated by both humans and Large Language Models (LLMs). The experiments were performed in a controlled environment designed to eliminate the confounding effects of social media algorithms and bot amplification.
Key Findings
- Superiority of Truth: Messages intended to be truthful were consistently more persuasive and more likely to be shared than messages designed to be false.
- Drivers of Persuasion: Perceived truthfulness was the primary factor that made a message persuasive.
- Drivers of Sharing: While truth mattered, positive emotion and social engagement had a bigger influence over the decision to share a message. This indicates that social connection is a priority when sharing information.
- The Competitive Edge: The authors conclude that truth holds an inherent advantage in a controlled marketplace of ideas wherein external technological manipulations are removed.
Main Takeaways
The study contextualizes these findings within modern information environments and classic psychological theory.
1. Reclaiming the “Marketplace of Ideas”
The authors argue that their results provide experimental support for the Miltonian ideal. When human psychology is the primary filter—undisturbed by algorithmic biases—truthful information tends to outperform misinformation in both its ability to change minds and its likelihood of being passed on. This suggests that misinformation may be a symptom of current platform designs rather than an inherent human preference for falsehood.
2. Persuasion vs. Transmission
A helpful insight in the discussion is the divergence between why we believe something and why we share it:
- Epistemic vs. Social Goals: People use truth as their primary metric when deciding what to believe (an epistemic goal).
- Social Connection: However, when sharing information, people prioritize social connection. Messages that evoke positive emotions or facilitate social bonding are shared more frequently. This is even the case when their truth value is misleading or slightly lower than factual.
The authors explain, “while people tend to prioritize the truth as a default, they are willing to sacrifice it to some extent for the sake of creating more engaging messages, as per the phrase ‘never let the truth get in the way of a good story.’”
3. Humans vs. AI
The study found that these patterns held true whether humans or LLMs (like GPT-3.5) wrote the messages. This suggests that the “signatures” of truth and persuasion are robust enough that AI can replicate them. Further, humans respond to those signals in a similar way regardless of whether the source is human or AI.
4. Limitations and Future Directions
- Controlled vs. Real-World: The authors acknowledge that their experiments prioritized “internal validity” (control) over “ecological validity” (real-world complexity). They warn that in the real world, other factors affect how messages are received including the communication channel, information frequency, perceived consensus, and audience characteristics, particularly their political identity.
- The Role of Algorithms: The discussion emphasizes that while truth tends to be preferred in their experiments, the real-world dominance of misinformation likely stems from social media preferences. This means the algorithms prioritize high-arousal, often divisive content, which may inadvertently suppress the advantages of truthful messages.
Final Thoughts
The “Truth Over Falsehood” study provides a hopeful counterpoint to the idea that humans are post-truth. It suggests that we are actually quite good at identifying and being moved by the truth, provided that the systems we use to communicate aren’t actively tilted to favor the spectacular or the false. 🟩
- Fay, N., Ransom, K. J., Walker, B., Howe, P. D. L., Perfors, A., & Kashima, Y. (2026). Truth over falsehood: Experimental evidence on what persuades and spreads. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 130(4), 684–700. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000467 ↩︎
Images: AI-assisted, Louis Caravella x Gemini.
Article opinions are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of CivicHaven.
Sign up to access early models of the CivicHaven chat assistant.