Why do people believe things that are easily disproven? It is one thing to accept false information but quite another to persist in a position that’s clearly wrong.
The Journal of Social Psychology has published a new study that suggests some people view it as a “win”, to embrace known falsehoods .
We’re psychologists, who study the political psychology of people and how they reason about reality. We surveyed 5,535 individuals in eight countries during the COVID-19 pandemic to find out why they believed COVID-19 false information, such as the false claim that 5G networks caused the virus.
If someone viewed COVID-19 preventive efforts as a matter of strength or weakness, that was the strongest predictor for whether they believed in misinformation about COVID-19 and its risks. This group was concerned with whether a particular action made them appear as if they were “giving in” or “fending off” untoward influences.
This factor was more important than how people felt in general about COVID-19, their way of thinking and even their political views.
The survey asked people to rate how much they agreed with statements such as “Following the coronavirus prevention guidelines is an indication that you are backing down” or “Continuous media coverage of coronavirus is a sign that we are losing.” We believe that those who responded positively would feel that by promoting misinformation, they were proving that “the enemy” will not be able to gain ground.
When meaning is not literal but symbolic
We suggest that people who have this mentality prioritize independence from outside influences over evaluating issues based on actual facts. You can say anything you want. The more difficult it is to disprove a statement, the greater the power of the statement.
When people think in this way, they are waging a psychological battle over the minds of people. The literal issue, here fighting COVID-19, is secondary. psychological battles, in the minds of those that believe they are engaged, are fought over attitudes and opinions, and won by controlling belief and messaging. The U.S. Government has at different times used the concept to limit foreign influence, convincing people that psychological independence is more important than literal battles.
In the same way, COVID-19 prevention measures such as masking, vaccination or COVID-19 testing could be viewed as a symbol of risk, which could “weaken”, even if it has a literal physical benefit. This may seem extreme, but the majority of our study participants did not have this mentality. Those who believed in misinformation were more likely to do so.
In a separate study, which focused on attitudes towards cryptocurrency, we asked people if they saw investing in crypto as a way to signal independence from traditional finance. The participants in this study who prioritized a symbol of strength were also more likely to believe other types of misinformation or conspiracies. For example, they believed that the government was hiding evidence of alien contact.
These links help explain why strongman leaders often use misinformation symbolically to a href=”https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/peter-pomerantsev/nothing-is-true and everything is possible/9781610396004/?lens=publicaffairs”>impress and control/a> a population. These links explain why strongman leader often use misinformation as a symbol to control and impress a population.
Why people endorse misinformation
For some, the literal truth does not matter.
In August 2025, for example, Donald Trump claimed incorrectly that crime was at an all time high in Washington D.C., which generated countless facts-checks and thought pieces on his dissociation with reality.
We believe, however, that debunkers are merely demonstrating to someone who has a symbol-based mindset that they are the ones reacting and therefore weak. It is easy to find the correct information, but it is irrelevant for someone who is more concerned with a symbol of strength. It’s important to show that you’re not listening and will not be influenced.
For symbol thinkers, almost any statement would be justified. Standing by something that is outlandish, or can be easily disproven, will make you appear more powerful. In their own strange way, being an Edgelord, a contrarian on-line provocateur, or lying outright can make you appear “authentic.”
Many people will also consider their favorite dissembler’s claims to be provocative trolling. However, because of the connection between this mentality and authoritarianism they still want these far-fetched statements acted upon. Even if the justification for sending National Guard troops to Washington is a transparent sham, the end goal can still be the deployment of National Guard soldiers.
This is 5-D chess, right?
It is possible that symbolic, but not exactly true, beliefs have some downstream benefit, such as serving as negotiation tactics, loyalty tests, or a fake-it-till-you-make-it long game that somehow, eventually, becomes a reality. The political theorist Murray Edelman is known for his work in symbolism. He noted that politicians prefer to score symbolic points than deliver results because it’s simpler. Leaders may use symbolism to gain attention when they don’t have much tangible to offer.
The author has not disclosed any relevant affiliations other than their academic appointment. They do not consult or own shares of companies or organizations that could benefit from the article.
