Social Media Overuse Correlates with Increased Susceptibility to Misinformation

The digital epidemic connecting social media addiction and fake news is now backed by hard evidence. People who struggle with problematic social media use are significantly more likely to believe and spread false information online, according to groundbreaking research from Michigan State University.

This worrying relationship could help explain the rapid proliferation of misinformation across social platforms and offers crucial insights for combating the fake news crisis. The study reveals that individuals most dependent on social media are paradoxically the most vulnerable to its deceptive content.

Researchers Dar Meshi and Maria D. Molina conducted an online experiment with 189 participants aged 18-26, presenting them with both authentic and false news stories formatted as social media posts. Their findings, published in the journal PLOS One, mark the first investigation to examine how problematic social media use relates specifically to fake news susceptibility through behavioral measures rather than self-reporting.

“Social media are everywhere in our daily lives, and some people display problematic, excessive use of these platforms. We found that this overuse is associated with a greater tendency to believe in and engage with misinformation,” explained Meshi, an associate professor and study co-author.

The experiment demonstrated that individuals with greater problematic social media use were more likely to judge fake news as credible compared to those with healthier online habits. This relationship wasn’t observed with real news stories, suggesting a specific vulnerability to false information rather than general gullibility.

More alarming still, the researchers discovered that problematic social media users were more likely to actively engage with misinformation across all metrics. They were more inclined to believe fake news, interact with news posts regardless of accuracy, specifically click on fake news posts, and showed a strong trend toward sharing false content.

These findings carry particular significance considering how social media platforms’ algorithms amplify content that generates high engagement. When problematic users interact with misinformation, they inadvertently help propel it to wider audiences.

“False news has become a hotly debated and researched topic because of its availability to be shared and spread over social media,” the researchers noted. “Over 60% of people in the U.S. read content on social media, and research has demonstrated that false news is disseminated over social media at a greater rate than real news.”

While not officially recognized as a clinical disorder by the American Psychiatric Association, problematic social media use shares concerning similarities with substance use and other behavioral addictions. Affected individuals experience distress when unable to access social media and often return to platforms despite attempts to quit.

Previous studies have linked such behavior to negative outcomes including job loss, poor academic performance, and declining mental health. Recent estimates suggest approximately 5% of young adults and 7% of adolescents globally may experience problematic social media use.

The susceptibility to misinformation likely involves multiple factors, including greater impulsivity and risk-taking behaviors previously associated with problematic social media use. These same cognitive patterns may lead to less careful evaluation of information credibility.

These insights could inform interventions by mental health professionals working with people struggling with social media dependency, particularly when patients might encounter misinformation about their own conditions online.

“Individuals with signs of problematic social media use may also be more susceptible to health-related misinformation, so clinicians specializing in different fields may benefit from awareness of their patients’ degree of social media use,” said Molina.

The research also has potential applications for broader efforts to limit fake news spread. “By identifying people who are more likely to believe fake news, we can help reduce its spread,” Meshi said. “Researchers could work with social media companies to find ways to help these users and limit their exposure to fake news.”

As social platforms continue to dominate information consumption patterns, understanding which users are most vulnerable to misinformation becomes increasingly vital. This research offers an important piece of the puzzle in addressing our current information crisis, suggesting that efforts to promote healthier social media habits might simultaneously help combat the spread of misinformation.

What remains unknown is the direction of causality: does problematic social media use make people more susceptible to fake news, or might repeated exposure to sensational false content contribute to unhealthy platform engagement? Future research will likely explore this relationship further, potentially revealing new intervention approaches for both interconnected problems.