Skip to content

PLOS is a non-profit organization on a mission to drive open science forward with measurable, meaningful change in research publishing, policy, and practice.

Building on a strong legacy of pioneering innovation, PLOS continues to be a catalyst, reimagining models to meet open science principles, removing barriers and promoting inclusion in knowledge creation and sharing, and publishing research outputs that enable everyone to learn from, reuse and build upon scientific knowledge.

We believe in a better future where science is open to all, for all.

PLOS BLOGS PLOS SciComm

Facebook’s Latest Misinformation Crisis is an Opportunity for Effective Science Communication

By Shahir S. Rizk and Maggie M. Fink

In 2013, a study revealed that more than 12 million Americans believe the world is run by reptilian shapeshifting aliens (1). Today, a staggering number of people believe in a wide range of conspiracy theories about the moon landing being faked (2), that Princess Diana was murdered and that she is somehow still alive (3), or that COVID-19 was intentionally created for some sinister purpose (4). While many conspiracy theories existed before social media, the internet has created a unique opportunity to rapidly disseminate misinformation (5). Despite fact-checking on many platforms, misinformation spreads at an alarming rate, about six times faster than accurate information (6). The recent decision by Mark Zuckerburg to remove fact-checking on Facebook is set to dramatically increase the prevalence of incorrect information and may set a worrisome precedent for other social media platforms to follow suit. Without these regulations, the spread of misinformation poses a dangerous threat to public trust in science.

Misinformation rooted in conspiracy theories seems alluring because of the enticing narratives they provide. They tell a “good story” where an event, often large or dramatic, is orchestrated by a handful of individuals–or even aliens–in a position of power for a specific hidden agenda. Individuals with little formal education are often considered the largest demographic of those who believe in conspiracy theories and misinformation. However, research tells us that even highly educated individuals can hold deeply unscientific views (7). This is because belief in conspiracy theories is not about a political position or belief system, but about identity and belonging (8). All sides of the political divide in the United States tend to hold antiscience views that align with their own group rather than being a sound interpretation of the underlying research (7). Moreover, research shows that individuals with higher levels of math literacy are less likely to correctly interpret data if the results do not align with their political ideologies (9).

How can we as scientists effectively engage with those who hold conspiracy theories to be self-evident? One approach has been to provide more scientifically accurate information. Yet evidence shows that providing information alone is not enough to change someone’s mind (10). Over and over this “information deficit hypothesis” has been abandoned by science communicators, as simply providing evidence is not sufficient and can serve to further polarize opposing views (11). In our own experience, this holds true, as we have interacted with many self-identifying flat earthers, another surprisingly common conspiracy theory. Our conversations often start on scientific topics like gravity, lines of sight, satellites, etc. During these conversations, our strategy has been predominantly Socratic; asking questions to find out more about the individuals’ beliefs and their worldview. Inevitably, the conversation turns from science to issues of faith, spirituality, and belongingness. Phrases like “a battle between good and evil” begin to emerge, and emotions like the fear of the vastness of space and the loneliness of being on a floating rock in an inhospitable universe come to the surface. This is not unique to flat earthers. Conspiracy theories are never about scientific evidence as much as they are about beliefs and the need for individuals to belong within a group.

Overcoming the spread of misinformation and rebuilding trust in our communities is an enormous task; however, we can begin to make a difference in our classrooms and research labs. We must teach our students to respect the dignity of those they disagree with, no matter how ridiculous their views may seem. We must teach students to recognize that conspiracy theorists are a marginalized community often abandoned by scientists or labeled as stupid, uneducated, or even unworthy of receiving scientific information (12). By planting the seeds of humility in our students, we are empowering them to reach across political and ideological divides and begin to build back trust (13).

Finally, as scientists, we must bring back the lost art of storytelling when communicating our research. Art and stories are innate to how humans communicate, connect, and make sense of our world, serving as a bridge between emotions, ideas, and understanding. The most influential books in the history of humanity have been storybooks. Data plots are only effective in communicating science to a specific group of individuals who are trained in the jargon. But story plots reach across cultural and political divides. By presenting evidence through creativity and storytelling, art can rebuild public trust, countering misinformation with clarity and empathy (14). It reminds us that science, much like art, is deeply connected to the human experience.

All of us strive to belong, to be accepted, and to make sense of an ever-changing world. To be sure, conspiracy theories are a real threat, and it is difficult to know what impact the changing regulations of social media conglomerates will have on the spread of misinformation. But we should be ready to fight misinformation, not with vitriol and frustration, but by building trust through humility and a genuine connection with our friends, families, and communities.

References

1.         T. Jensen, Democrats and Republicans differ on conspiracy theory beliefs. Public Policy Polling 2,  (2013).

2.         C. Lano, in Messages from the Moon: A Global History of the First Manned Moon Landing. (Springer, 2024), pp. 199-213.

3.         M. J. Wood, K. M. Douglas, R. M. Sutton, Dead and alive: Beliefs in contradictory conspiracy theories. Social psychological and personality science 3, 767-773 (2012).

4.         J. E. Uscinski et al., Why do people believe COVID-19 conspiracy theories? Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review 1,  (2020).

5.         C. Birchall, P. Knight, Do your own research: Conspiracy theories and the internet. Social Research: An International Quarterly 89, 579-605 (2022).

6.         S. Vosoughi, D. Roy, S. Aral, The spread of true and false news online. science 359, 1146-1151 (2018).

7.         A. J. Hoffman, How Culture Shapes the Climate Change Debate.  (Stanford University Press, Stanford, 2015), pp. 120.

8.         E. A. Wheeler, How belief in conspiracy theories addresses some basic human needs. The psychology of political behavior in a time of change, 263-276 (2021).

9.         D. M. Kahan, E. Peters, E. C. Dawson, P. Slovic, Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Behavioural public policy 1, 54-86 (2017).

10.       S. Seethaler, J. H. Evans, C. Gere, R. M. Rajagopalan, Science, values, and science communication: Competencies for pushing beyond the deficit model. Science Communication 41, 378-388 (2019).

11.       S. Lewandowsky, U. K. Ecker, C. M. Seifert, N. Schwarz, J. Cook, Misinformation and its correction: Continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychological science in the public interest 13, 106-131 (2012).

12.       K.-T. Poon, Z. Chen, W.-Y. Wong, Beliefs in conspiracy theories following ostracism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 46, 1234-1246 (2020).

13.       J. Koetke, K. Schumann, S. M. Bowes, N. Vaupotič, The effect of seeing scientists as intellectually humble on trust in scientists and their research. Nature Human Behaviour, 1-14 (2024).

14.       I. I. Villanueva et al., When Science Meets Art on Instagram: Examining the Effects of Visual Art on Emotions, Interest, and Social Media Engagement. Science Communication 46, 210-238 (2024).

Shahir Rizk is an Egyptian-American biochemist, poet, and illustrator. He is the author of “The Color of North: The Molecular Language of Proteins and the Future of Life” (Harvard University Press). Shahir is a professor of Chemistry and Biochemistry at Indiana University South Bend and the IU School of Medicine. He is a Cottrell Scholar, a science communicator, and the co-host of the “Rust Belt Science” Podcast. Shahir’s poetry has appeared in The Acorn, Modern Haiku, and Twyckenham Notes.

Maggie M. Fink is a microbiologist, writer, and artist. She is the author of “The Color of North: The Molecular Language of Proteins and the Future of Life” (Harvard University Press). Maggie is an adjunct Professor at Indiana University South Bend and a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Notre Dame, where she divides her time between science communication and studying bacterial genetics. She is also the co-host of the podcast “Rust Belt Science“.

Related Posts
Back to top