# Real-time processing of misinformation and its correction: Insights from eye movements during reading

## TL;DR

This study explores how people process and remember misinformation and its corrections in real-time using eye movements and cognitive tests.

## Contribution

The study introduces real-time eye-tracking indicators of misinformation susceptibility and examines the role of cognitive abilities in processing corrections.

## Key findings

- Retractions increased processing effort and reduced re-reading of non-causal details.
- Higher reading proficiency and verbal working memory reduced misinformation susceptibility.
- Longer reading times were linked to reduced susceptibility when retractions lacked explicit reminders.

## Abstract

People often continue to rely on information even after it has been retracted–a phenomenon known as the continued-influence effect (CIE) of misinformation. This study investigated real-time indicators of misinformation susceptibility by recording the eye movements of 74 participants as they read pairs of newspaper-style articles containing critical information about the cause of an event that was either retracted or not. A post-reading questionnaire assessed memory for the passages and inferential judgements related to the retracted information. The roles of individual differences in language proficiency and working memory on the CIE were also tested. Questionnaire data replicated prior findings that repetition of the original information improved recall memory for the event. Eye-tracking data revealed that retractions were associated with increased processing effort during encoding of corrective information and reduced re-reading of non-causal details. Reminders of the original misinformation were linked to faster overall reading speeds. Higher reading proficiency predicted greater reductions in misinformation susceptibility, and both reading proficiency and verbal working memory capacity facilitated real-time processing of causal information. Finally, longer reading times and slower reading speeds were tentatively associated with reduced misinformation susceptibility but only when retractions were presented without explicit reminders. Together, these findings suggest that misinformation susceptibility reflects both individual differences in cognitive abilities and the effectiveness of reminder-based corrections.