Illusory truth effect

The illusory truth effect (also known as t he illusion of truth effect , validity effect , truth
effect , or t he reiteration effect ) is t he t endency t o believe false informat ion t o be correct
aft er repeat ed exposure.[1] This phenomenon was first ident ified in a 1977 st udy at Villanova
Universit y and Temple Universit y.[2][3] When t rut h is assessed, people rely on whet her t he
informat ion is in line wit h t heir underst anding or if it feels familiar. The first condit ion is logical, as
people compare new informat ion wit h what t hey already know t o be t rue. Repet it ion makes
st at ement s easier t o process relat ive t o new, unrepeat ed st at ement s, leading people t o believe
t hat t he repeat ed conclusion is more t rut hful. The illusory t rut h effect has also been linked t o
hindsight bias, in which t he recollect ion of confidence is skewed aft er t he t rut h has been
received.

In a 2015 st udy, researchers discovered t hat familiarit y can overpower rat ionalit y and t hat
repet it ively hearing t hat a cert ain st at ement is wrong can paradoxically cause it t o feel right .[4]
Researchers at t ribut ed t he illusory t rut h effect 's impact even on part icipant s who knew t he
correct answer t o begin wit h, but were persuaded t o believe ot herwise t hrough t he repet it ion of
a falsehood, t o "processing fluency".

The illusory t rut h effect plays a significant role in fields such as advert ising, news media, and
polit ical propaganda.
Initial study
The effect was first named and defined following t he result s in a st udy from 1977 at Villanova
Universit y and Temple Universit y where part icipant s were asked t o rat e a series of t rivia
st at ement s as t rue or false.[2][5] On t hree occasions, Lynn Hasher, David Goldst ein, and Thomas
Toppino present ed t he same group of college st udent s wit h list s of sixt y plausible st at ement s,
some of t hem t rue and some of t hem false. The second list was dist ribut ed t wo weeks aft er
t he first , and t he t hird t wo weeks aft er t hat . Twent y st at ement s appeared on all t hree list s; t he
ot her fort y it ems on each list were unique t o t hat list . Part icipant s were asked how confident
t hey were of t he t rut h or falsit y of t he st at ement s, which concerned mat t ers about which t hey
were unlikely t o know anyt hing. (For example, "The first air force base was launched in New
Mexico." Or "Basket ball became an Olympic discipline in 1925.") Specifically, t he part icipant s were
asked t o grade t heir belief in t he t rut h of each st at ement on a scale of one t o seven. While t he
part icipant s' confidence in t he t rut h of t he non-repeat ed st at ement s remained st eady, t heir
confidence in t he t rut h of t he repeat ed st at ement s increased from t he first t o t he second and
second t o t hird sessions, wit h an average score for t hose it ems rising from 4.2 t o 4.6 t o 4.7. The
conclusion made by t he researchers was t hat repeat ing a st at ement makes it more likely t o
appear fact ual.[1][2]

In 1989, Hal R. Arkes, Cat herine Hacket t , and Larry Boehm replicat ed t he original st udy, wit h
similar result s showing t hat exposure t o false informat ion changes t he perceived t rut hfulness
and plausibilit y of t hat informat ion.[6]

The effect works because when people assess t rut h, t hey rely on whet her t he informat ion
agrees wit h t heir underst anding or whet her it feels familiar. The first condit ion is logical as
people compare new informat ion wit h what t hey already know t o be t rue and consider t he
credibilit y of bot h sources. However, researchers discovered t hat familiarit y can overpower
rat ionalit y—so much so t hat repet it ively hearing t hat a cert ain fact is wrong can paradoxically
cause it t o feel right .[4]
Relation to other phenomena

Processing fluency
At first , t he t rut h effect was believed t o occur only when individuals are highly uncert ain about a
given st at ement .[1] Psychologist s also assumed t hat "out landish" headlines wouldn't produce t his
effect however, recent research shows t he illusory t rut h effect is indeed at play wit h false
news.[5] This assumpt ion was challenged by t he result s of a 2015 st udy by Lisa K. Fazio, Nadia M.
Brasier, B. Keit h Payne, and Elizabet h J. Marsh. Published in t he Journal of Experimental
Psychology; t he st udy suggest ed t hat t he t rut h effect can influence part icipant s who act ually
knew t he correct answer t o begin wit h, but who were swayed t o believe ot herwise t hrough t he
repet it ion of a falsehood. For example, when part icipant s encount ered on mult iple occasions t he
st at ement "A sari is t he name of t he short plaid skirt worn by Scot s," some of t hem were likely t o
come t o believe it was t rue, even t hough t hese same people were able t o correct ly answer t he
quest ion "What is t he name of t he short pleat ed skirt worn by Scot s?"

Aft er replicat ing t hese result s in anot her experiment , Fazio and her t eam at t ribut ed t his curious
phenomenon t o processing fluency, t he facilit y wit h which people comprehend st at ement s.
"Repet it ion," explained t he researcher, "makes st at ement s easier t o process (i.e. fluent ) relat ive
t o new st at ement s, leading people t o t he (somet imes) false conclusion t hat t hey are more
t rut hful."[7][8] When an individual hears somet hing for a second or t hird t ime, t heir brain responds
fast er t o it and misat t ribut es t hat fluency as a signal for t rut h.[9]

Hindsight bias
In a 1997 st udy, Ralph Hert wig, Gerd Gigerenzer, and Ulrich Hoffrage linked t he t rut h effect t o
t he phenomenon known as "hindsight bias", described as a sit uat ion in which t he recollect ion of
confidence is skewed aft er t he t rut h or falsit y has been received. They have described t he t rut h
effect (which t hey call "t he reit erat ion effect ") as a subset of hindsight bias.[10]
Other studies
In a 1979 st udy, part icipant s were t old t hat repeat ed st at ement s were no more likely t o be t rue
t han unrepeat ed ones. Despit e t his warning, t he part icipant s perceived repeat ed st at ement s as
being more t rue t han unrepeat ed ones.[6]

St udies in 1981 and 1983 showed t hat informat ion deriving from recent experience t ends t o be
viewed as "more fluent and familiar" t han new experience. A 2011 st udy by Jason D. Ozubko and
Jonat han Fugelsang built on t his finding by demonst rat ing t hat , generally speaking, informat ion
ret rieved from memory is "more fluent or familiar t han when it was first learned" and t hus
produces an illusion of t rut h. The effect grew even more pronounced when st at ement s were
repeat ed t wice and yet more pronounced when t hey were repeat ed four t imes. The researchers
t hus concluded t hat memory ret rieval is a powerful met hod for increasing t he so-called validit y
of st at ement s and t hat t he illusion of t rut h is an effect t hat can be observed wit hout direct ly
polling t he fact ual st at ement s in quest ion.[11]

A 1992 st udy by Ian Maynard Begg, Ann Anas, and Suzanne Farinacci suggest ed t hat a st at ement
will seem t rue if t he informat ion seems familiar.[6]

A 2012 experiment by Danielle C. Polage showed t hat some part icipant s exposed t o false news
st ories would go on t o have false memories. The conclusion was t hat repet it ive false claims
increase believabilit y and may also result in errors.[6][5]

In a 2014 st udy, Eryn J. Newman, Mevagh Sanson, Emily K. Miller, Adele Quigley-McBride, Jeffrey
L. Fost er, Daniel M. Bernst ein, and Maryanne Garry asked part icipant s t o judge t he t rut h of
st at ement s at t ribut ed t o various people, some of whose names were easier t o pronounce t han
ot hers. Consist ent ly, st at ement s by persons wit h easily pronounced names were viewed as being
more t rut hful t han t hose wit h names t hat were harder t o pronounce. The researchers' conclusion
was t hat subject ive, t angent ial propert ies such as ease of processing can mat t er when people
evaluat e sourced informat ion.[3]