Misinformers use a variety of tactics to deceive and distort reality.
They will cherry-pick the data or the scientific evidence that fits with their agenda, but critics ignore all other facts. They will attack the science or the expert instead of the arguments.
There are many tactics used to disseminate misinformation. Most of these tactics are used to make you believe false information or to shift your focus towards something irrelevant to the real issue.
We deep dive into 3 misleading claims misinformers have made lately and share what they “forgot” to tell you while doing so.
When looking at science, it is important take in the full picture. Share this with your friends and family to make sure they get the full story.
Share our original Tweet!
Misinformers use a variety of tactics to deceive and distort reality.
Check out this deep dive into 3 misleading claims misinformers made lately https://t.co/oas2iW2baN
The Canadian bill for misinformation during the pandemic is out and it’s steep.
Last month, the Council of Canadian Academies (CCA)* released their report on the socioeconomic impacts in Canada of science and health misinformation (1,2,3).
Here is a summary of their findings
Over 2.35 million of people living in Canada could have been vaccinated if they did not believe the COVID-19 pandemic was a hoax or less serious than it was because of misinformation. If that many more people would have been vaccinated as of the end of November 2021, we could have avoided (1,2):
198,000 COVID cases
13,000 hospitalizations
3,500 visits to the ICU
2,800 deaths
These extra hospitalizations and ICU visits are estimated to have cost us nothing less than $299 million. Vaccine misinformation has put a huge strain on our healthcare system, contributed to new variants and has slowed our economic recovery (1,4). This might seem like a lot, but the real numbers are expected to be much higher as this report only looked at the misinformation impact from March to November 2021 (1,3).
Now more than ever, we need to learn how to recognize misinformation. By learning misinformer tactics you create cognitive antibodies and resistance against future misinformation exposure. You can learn more about misinformer tactics on our website (5).
When you see misinformation online, take a screenshot of it and then share it with your circle. Never share misinformation directly as it can increase its reach in the algorithm. Sharing verified information from trusted and credible sources also helps!
*The CCA is a not-for-profit organization that provides independent, science-based reports for the public. This report was conducted and written by a panel of 13 independent experts from all over Canada and was peer-reviewed before being published (1,6).
Share our original Tweet!
Last month, the CCA (@cca_reports) released their report on the socioeconomic impacts in Canada of science and health misinformation.
Conclusion: the Canadian bill for misinformation during the pandemic is steep.#ScienceUpFirst
We know we have been using gas stoves for years, but it does not mean they are safe – it’s time to change our ways!
Gas stoves have been proven to emit pollutants in your home even when you are not cooking (1). Some of these chemicals are known lung irritants, cancer-causing agents, and very powerful greenhouse gasses (1,4,11).
The best way to avoid these detrimental effects on your health and the planet is to replace your gas stove with an electric stove (1). But we know that is not always a possibility, so keep reading to learn other ways you can reduce their impacts.
If you have a gas stove at home, it is very important that you also have a carbon monoxide (CO) detector to avoid any risk of CO poisoning (12).
Pollution exposure from your gas stove might not be as important as many other pollution sources you might be exposed to on a daily basis, but it is one that can definitely be avoided (5).
Share our original Tweet!
Gas stoves have been proven to emit pollutants in your home even when you are not cooking.
Some of these chemicals are known cancer causing-agents, lung irritants, and very powerful greenhouse gasses.#ScienceUpFirst
Picture this… Your uncle emails you a health claim as proof that the latest conspiracy theory is true. It’s full of jargon and outside your expertise – but something about it seems fishy!
It’s not always easy to check if a claim is true, especially if it relates to a scientific or technical field in which you have no background. Fortunately, you don’t need to be an expert yourself to spot misinformation
When face-to-face with a suspicious claim there are a few questions to ask yourself:
Does the person making the claim have the relevant expertise?
Does the claim come from a reputable source or peer-reviewed journal?
Does the claim correspond to what its source suggests? You’d be surprised how often that’s not the case.
Does the author use manipulation techniques like emotional language, black-and-white thinking, blaming a single individual or group for a complicated problem, and attacking a person rather than an argument?
Don’t have time to ask all these questions? Simply asking ourselves “is this accurate” makes us less vulnerable to misinformation and less likely to pass it on (1).
Believing misinformation is NOT a reflection of someone’s moral character or intelligence. Misinformers have a slew of tactics they use that could catch anyone off guard.
Most of the time, people do not want to share inaccurate information. In one study 80% of respondents felt it was very important to only share accurate content online (1) Research finds that folks are more likely to fall for fake news when we rely on our emotions (2).
It turns out that people of ALL ages around the world are vulnerable to misinformation. While adults 65+ are more likely to share fake news stories on Facebook (3), conspiracy theories are being spread by teens on TikTok (4). A recent survey of over 20,000 Americans found that the younger you are, the more likely you are to believe in false claims about COVID-19 (5).
The good news is there are things you can do that make you less vulnerable:
Always read past the headline
Check the source. Is it reputable? ️
Learn the tactics of misinformers. If you know the tricks you are less likely to fall for them. We break down a bunch of these on our website.
Believing misinformation is NOT a reflection of someone’s moral character or intelligence. Misinformers have a slew of tactics they use that could catch anyone off guard.#ScienceUpFirst
Do you know about DeepFakes? They’re trickier than defending your home from the wet bandits!
DeepFakes are manipulated videos, or other digital representations, made by artificial intelligence. The goal is to make fake images and sounds that appear to be real. Misinformers can use this technology to create media that helps support their agenda.
They can be funny and entertaining, but as the technology improves people need to become more thoughtful about what they’re seeing on the screen.
DeepFakes are getting better all the time but focusing on the weaknesses of the software makes it easier to spot when something isn’t real.
Watch our video for tips on how to spot them for yourself.
View our original Tweet!
DeepFakes are trickier than defending your home from the wet bandits.
They’re getting better all the time but focusing on the weaknesses of the software makes it easier to spot when something isn’t real.
Watch our video for tips on how to spot them. #ScienceUpFirst
In science, just like with everything, it’s important to look at the full picture.
If some information is missing or taken out of context, you might not reach the correct conclusion. By only showing or omitting certain information or data, misinformers push you toward conclusions that fit their narrative.
With the COP27 happening right now, we thought it would be appropriate to show you how disinformers have been using this tactic to deny climate change
Disinformers will include only a narrow range of data, neglecting the fact that climate data needs to be interpreted in a minimum cycle of 30 years. The next trick they use is to start the graph with an exceptionally warm year (without telling you so, of course!) and end with a colder one. This would result in a graph showing, what it looks like, a decrease in global surface temperature.
Global mean surface air temperature data are just like pixels in a picture: the more pixels you have the better the picture is. Similarly, the more data are included the clearer the trend will be. LOWESS (locally weighted scatter plot smooth) regression line is used to show a trend more clearly with data that have a lot of noise or natural variation like climate data (12,13). This regression line (grey line) is only shown in the last two graphics, given the need for sufficient sample size to estimate local regression (14). In this example, the trend shows a clear global surface air temperature increase since 1880.
A big thank you to Dr. Sarah Treit at @figures.first for collaborating with us on this post! Stay tuned as we unravel together more ways data can be misrepresented!
Remember, when looking at data, make sure that you have the full picture.
*Temperature anomaly refers to the difference in temperature from that year relative to the average temperature from 1951 to 1980, as defined by NASA(15,16).
Share our original Tweet!
In science, just like with everything, it’s important to look at the full picture.
What would you conclude about Climate Change based on this graphic only?#ScienceUpFirst
Spotting misinformation online can sometimes be tricky, but most of the time you can spot some red flags
One red flag is not always a bad thing, but it’s a sign that you should dive deeper before you share the information. The more red flags a content has, the more suspicious you should be.
You should investigate the content deeper if it:
Does not cite its sources or the cited sources don’t support the claims that are made
Uses strong emotional language
Only shows one side of the story
Is going against the general consensus without evidence
A few other things you should keep an eye for:
Check the “about us” section on the website to know what is the goal of the organization and do they collaborate with experts or not (4).
Always read beyond the headline to get the full picture. Misinformers will often use “clickbait” title (1).
Check the date of the information that is cited. Misinformers will use old information, even though our understanding of the subject has deepened over time (11).
Don’t forget to assess your own bias. Sometimes, what we believe in can get in the way of our judgment (2). It’s more than ok to change our mind.
Share our original Tweet!
Spotting misinformation online can sometimes be tricky, but most of the time you can spot some red flags #ScienceUpFirst
A systematic review examined “individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation.” The results suggest those most likely to believe misinformation had conspiracy thinking, religiosity, conservative ideology, and using social media as an information source. Those able to resist misinformation were more educated, have more subject knowledge, literacy and numeracy skills, analytical thinking, and trust in science. (October 21, 2022)
It’s a simple question. But even simple questions can create BIG debates. Some debates aren’t so straightforward – have you ever been in a disagreement with someone, where sharing the facts was not enough and the situation rapidly escalated to personal attacks?
Science Everywhere (@whereisscience) knows that encouraging scientific inquiry and value is as important as sharing scientific facts for science communication to be successful. Like they say, “It’s not what you think. It’s how.”
Science Everywhere uses games to create a relaxed and jovial environment where true dialogue, free of defensiveness, can happen.
During their Freestyle Socials events, participants are asked silly questions such as “Cake or Pie?”. They must pick sides and try to convince the other team using surprising or funny perspectives. Because the questions can’t be taken seriously, neither are the arguments. This strategy primes the players to be more receptive to new ideas and ready to learn from others instead of being defensive when serious questions are asked.
We’ve been delighted to work with Science Everywhere to sponsor a successful Freestyle Socials event for our community partner, @LotusSTEMM. The players engaged in meaningful and fun discussions about COVID-19 boosters, nutrition and misinformation.
We are looking forward to our partnership with Science Everywhere and supporting Freestyle Socials events in other communities across Canada.
Homeopathy can be appealing as it is marketed to be tailored to everyone’s specific needs and as a gentle medicine. But it is also controversial and an unproven system of care. Here is why
Controversial because it follows principles that don’t align with those of modern science.
Unproven because most studies have yet to find any true benefit to them other than the placebo effect. Don’t get us wrong, the placebo effect can be very strong, but it doesn’t mean homeopathic products should be used to treat a serious health condition.
For these reasons, homeopathic products like nosodes should also never be used to prevent a serious health condition. Advertising these products as “cures” is severely misleading and can be very dangerous.
If you are feeling unwell, your best option is to talk to a licensed healthcare professional first.
Share our original Tweet!
Homeopathy can be appealing as it is marketed as a gentle medicine, tailored to everyone’s specific needs. But it is also a controversial, unproven system of care. Here is why #ScienceUpFirst
“If I fail today’s test, then I’ll fail my class, and I won’t get my diploma. Without my diploma I won’t get the job I want; I won’t have any money and will become homeless! Therefore, if I fail my test today, I’ll become homeless.”
Misinformers know catastrophic thinking pulls on your fear and anxiety (1,2). That’s why they will use this cognitive distortion to make you believe that a minor event could lead to a catastrophic event (2,3). By using the slippery slope tactic misinformers shift your attention from the real issue toward one that is hypothetical and unfounded using extreme exaggeration, emotions, and fears (4,5).
Slippery slope arguments always have a mild start point and an extreme endpoint with no way to stop in between and no middle ground. They are fallacious as they don’t acknowledge the small probability that one event will actually lead to the catastrophic event and assume your inability to differentiate between these two opposite events (5).
When dealing with a slippery slope argument, try pointing out (5):
How pieces of information are missing
How disconnected the different events are
How far apart the start and end point are
How it would be possible to stop in the middle if desired
“If I fail today’s test, I’ll fail my class, and I won’t get my diploma. Without a diploma I won’t get a job; will have no money and will become homeless! Therefore, if I fail my test today, I’ll become homeless.”#ScienceUpFirst
What do you call a research paper that’s been retracted, but keeps coming back in arguments? A zombie paper!
These research papers are often retracted because of research misconduct.There are 3 main forms of research misconduct:
Fabrication → when the data or results reported are made up
Falsification → when some data or results are either omitted, manipulated, or presented in a way that does not adequately represent the research
Plagiarism → when someone else’s ideas, results or words are used as their own without credit
Zombie papers can have a major impact on public health, the general public trust in science, and future research as well. Zombie papers are often used by misinformers, so be careful!
Want to know if a paper has been retracted? Enter the title or the authors’ names in the The Retraction Watch Database at retractiondatabase.org to find out, and make sure you are only looking at the most up-to-date science!
Remember, science does not perform misconduct, ill-intended individuals do.
View our original Tweet!
What do you call a research paper that’s been retracted, but keeps coming back in arguments? A zombie paper!
