IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ebl/ecbull/eb-23-00145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How relevant is information? Some experimental evidence

Author

Listed:
  • Pedro Hemsley

    (UFRJ)

  • Marcio Firmo

    (PUC-Rio)

  • Vitor Onuki

    (UFRJ)

Abstract

This paper examines the role of information from expert sources in opinion formation. While fact checking with experts has been widely adopted as a tool to fight fake news, it remains unclear whether people actually use such information to form their opinions, given that opinion formation may be influenced by a variety of factors. To investigate this, we conducted online experiments on three topics (gun violence, global warming, and Covid-19) to measure the impact of information from experts on opinion formation. Participants were randomly assigned to a treatment or control group, with the former receiving objective information from expert sources about the topic and the latter receiving none. Results indicate that objective information had a non-significant impact on opinion formation across all topics, which raises concerns about the effectiveness of using it to counter fake news. Additionally, we find a strong correlation between political position and opinion formation.

Suggested Citation

  • Pedro Hemsley & Marcio Firmo & Vitor Onuki, 2023. "How relevant is information? Some experimental evidence," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 43(4), pages 1741-1748.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-23-00145
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.accessecon.com/Pubs/EB/2023/Volume43/EB-23-V43-I4-P149.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Objective information; trust in experts; fact checking; opinion formation; fake news;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D8 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty
    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ebl:ecbull:eb-23-00145. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: John P. Conley (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.