A new study by CCPP Faculty Director Erik Nisbet, CCPP graduate affiliate Chloe Mortenson, and R. Kelly Garrett (Ohio State University) examines how Americans’ beliefs about online misinformation may influence their satisfaction with democracy. The article, “The Presumed Prevalence/Persuasiveness of Online Misinformation and Americans’ Dissatisfaction With Democracy,” was recently published in Social Media + Society.
Over the past decade, public concern about online misinformation has grown dramatically, particularly following the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Policymakers, journalists, and the public increasingly view misinformation circulating on social media as a major threat to democratic institutions. Yet a growing body of research suggests that exposure to political misinformation online is relatively limited for most Americans and that its direct persuasive effects are modest.
The new study takes a different perspective. Rather than focusing on whether misinformation itself changes attitudes or behavior, the researchers investigate how people’s perceptions about the prevalence and influence of misinformation affect their views of democracy.
When Perceptions Matter More Than Exposure
The study introduces the concept of the Presumed Prevalence/Persuasiveness of Online Misinformation (P3OM). This framework distinguishes between two perceptions:
- Perceived prevalence – how widespread people believe misinformation is online
- Perceived persuasiveness – how much they believe misinformation influences other voters
Drawing on the “influence of presumed influence” tradition in communication research, the authors argue that these perceptions can shape political attitudes even when individuals themselves are not directly affected by misinformation.
Two Studies Across Recent U.S. Elections
To test this idea, the researchers conducted two complementary studies during recent U.S. election cycles.
First, they analyzed data from an eight-wave national panel survey conducted around the 2020 presidential election. The results show that when individuals perceived misinformation as more widespread or more persuasive to others, they reported lower satisfaction with how democracy works in the United States.
Second, the researchers conducted a large survey experiment during the 2022 midterm election period. Participants exposed to messages about online misinformation, whether framed as highly influential or relatively rare, reported lower levels of democratic satisfaction than those in a control group.
Taken together, the findings suggest that public discourse about misinformation itself may have unintended political consequences.
Implications for Public Debate About Misinformation
The study highlights an underappreciated challenge for democratic societies. While misinformation can certainly be harmful, repeated warnings about its prevalence and influence may also erode trust in democratic processes if people come to believe that other voters are easily manipulated.
The authors argue that journalists, policymakers, and researchers should communicate about misinformation in more nuanced ways, placing its prevalence in context and avoiding exaggerated claims about its impact.
Understanding the perceived information environment, not just the actual information environment, may therefore be essential for protecting democratic legitimacy in an era of intense concern about misinformation.
Read the Study
The full article is available here:
Mortenson, C., Nisbet, E. C., & Garrett, R. K. (2026). The Presumed Prevalence/Persuasiveness of Online Misinformation and Americans’ Dissatisfaction With Democracy. Social Media + Society.