In the ongoing battle against misinformation, one prevailing belief is that strong emotions cloud our judgment, making people more prone to accepting false news. However, a new study from the Complexity Science Hub (CSH) challenges this simplistic assumption by shedding light on the complex role emotions play in shaping our perceptions and decision-making.
[Vienna, 11.02.2025]—Research has shown that emotions serve as essential tools in how we interpret the world and make decisions. “They are part of intelligent human behavior,” says Hannah Metzler, a neuroscientist and psychologist at the Complexity Science Hub.
According to Metzler, lead author of the study, to better understand the emotional dynamic around misinformation, it is critical to consider various factors that influence emotional responses to news—such as pre-existing emotions, the content of the news, and the trust we place in the news source.
“When thinking about the emotions of someone who reads a false news headline, and asking if the emotion will make it more likely to believe the news, it matters why they are angry: for example, because they had a fight with their partner, or because the content of the news headline made them feel angry,” explains Metzler.
Mood and Emotional Response
In the study, Metzler and her team explored the relationship of emotions with people’s ability to distinguish between real and false news, specifically in the context of Covid-19 misinformation. The study examined both the emotional state people experienced before reading news headlines—their mood—and the emotions triggered by the news content itself—their emotional response.
The researchers conducted their study with 422 participants from Austria during a pivotal period in the Covid-19 pandemic, when vaccines were being rolled out. Participants were shown various news headlines with images and asked to rate their accuracy while also reporting any emotions they felt in response.
Emotions Don't Seem to Impair Judgment
The results revealed surprising insights. Contrary to the common assumption that emotions impair judgment, the emotional state participants were in before reading the news did not significantly affect their ability to identify false news.
“We found no significant relationship between participants' emotional state throughout the last days before viewing news items and their ability to tell apart real from false news,” says Metzler.
“A common assumption is that people get more susceptible to false news when they feel anxious, such as at the start of a pandemic. But our results contradict the simple idea that feeling emotions always make people less rational, regardless of what the source, or the reason, for the emotion is—in this case, any events in the person’s life before they read the news.”
Fake News Triggered More Anger
However, the emotions triggered by the content of the news played a pivotal role, according to the study. False news headlines, particularly those related to Covid-19 topics such as vaccine safety, effectiveness, and PCR testing, elicited more anger and less joy compared to real news. Interestingly, those who felt anger in response to false news were more likely to correctly identify it as false, points out Metzler. These participants often expressed frustration, using terms like "bullshit," "nonsense," or "fake news."
The study also revealed that individuals’ emotional responses to news were often aligned with their pre-existing beliefs about Covid-19. People who had fewer misconceptions about Covid-19 vaccines, for example, tended to feel angrier at false news and less angry at real news, suggesting that emotions helped guide attention to news that resonated with their existing understanding.
Emotions Don’t Make Us More Stupid
“Our observations underline the notion that individuals interpret news in a way that aligns with their pre-existing beliefs. Emotions may play a role in directing attention towards information that could be relevant for us. So emotions don’t simply make us more stupid, but give us important social information, like whether we agree with someone or not”, explains Metzler.
While the study provides valuable insights, it is important to note that the emotions reported in an online survey do not fully replicate real-world experiences, adds the CSH researcher. People typically encounter news in more dynamic and emotionally charged environments, such as on social media. Metzler and her team are continuing to explore these dynamics in other studies to better understand how emotions shape our engagement with news in everyday contexts.
About the Study
The paper “Emotions in misinformation studies: distinguishing affective state from emotional response and misinformation recognition from acceptance”, by Jula Lühring, Apeksha Shetty, Corinna Koschmieder, David Garcia, Annie Waldherr & Hannah Metzler, appears in Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications and is available online.
About CSH
The Complexity Science Hub (CSH) is Europe’s research center for the study of complex systems. We derive meaning from data from a range of disciplines—economics, medicine, ecology, and the social sciences—as a basis for actionable solutions for a better world. Established in 2015, we have grown to over 70 researchers, driven by the increasing demand to gain a genuine understanding of the networks that underlie society, from healthcare to supply chains. Through our complexity science approaches linking physics, mathematics, and computational modeling with data and network science, we develop the capacity to address today’s and tomorrow’s challenges.
