Global Study Identifies Groups Most Vulnerable to Misinformation

The smartphone revolution has ignited a wildfire of misinformation that continues to spread through social media platforms with alarming speed. As fringe conspiracy theories gain traction through tweets, Reddit posts, and messaging apps, recent data suggests Americans are increasingly struggling to separate fact from fiction.

According to a late 2024 Pew Research Center survey, more than half of Americans (52%) find it difficult to determine what is true regarding election news. Even more concerning, 28% reported challenges finding reliable information about the election altogether. This information crisis has driven growing public support for government intervention, with 55% of U.S. adults now favoring federal restrictions on false information—a significant increase from 39% in 2018.

Against this backdrop, a comprehensive new study published in Personality and Individual Differences has investigated who is most vulnerable to misinformation. The research team, comprised of British and Canadian scientists, examined 66,000 participants across 24 countries using the Misinformation Susceptibility Test (MIST), which measures how effectively people distinguish between real and fake news headlines.

“No matter who you are, no matter what you think you know, none of us is immune to misinformation,” warned senior author Dr. Friedrich Götz, assistant professor of psychology at the University of British Columbia. “People should realize that all of us are exposed to misinformation on a regular basis, and all of us are likely to fall for it at some point.”

One of the study’s most surprising findings challenges conventional wisdom about digital literacy. Generation Z—despite growing up in the digital age—performed worse on the MIST than all other generations, including Baby Boomers. Paradoxically, these younger participants were most accurate in assessing their own misinformation-detection abilities, suggesting self-awareness doesn’t necessarily translate to competence.

“There’s still this widespread misconception that digital natives are better at navigating these environments,” noted Dr. Götz. “That has been debunked in the academic world for quite a few years, but I don’t think it has translated into public consciousness.”

Researchers attribute Gen Z’s vulnerability to the poor quality of information they routinely consume in their digital ecosystems.

The study also revealed significant demographic patterns. Men generally outperformed women and non-binary individuals in detecting misinformation. However, women demonstrated greater accuracy in estimating their own detection abilities. Men—particularly those identifying as extremely conservative—tended to overestimate their skills at distinguishing real news from fake.

Education emerged as a crucial protective factor. Participants with higher formal education consistently scored better on the MIST, with those holding graduate or professional degrees proving least susceptible to misinformation. Conversely, those with only high school diplomas demonstrated the greatest vulnerability.

Political orientation played a substantial role as well. Conservative participants showed higher susceptibility to misinformation compared to liberal counterparts, with the disparity widening among those identifying as “extremely conservative.” This group also exhibited the most significant disconnect between confidence and actual performance in detecting fake news.

Cross-national differences were also evident. Participants from Belgium, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands, and Sweden performed on par with Americans (the study’s reference group). However, participants from China, Germany, and several non-English-speaking nations scored significantly lower—a disparity researchers attribute to MIST being administered only in English.

These findings come at a critical time when combating misinformation remains a global priority. The World Economic Forum has highlighted information integrity as a key concern for democratic societies worldwide.

“My sense is that not all democracies right now are really trying to address this problem. Worse yet, in the polarized world we live in, some actors, including politicians, may deliberately weaponize it,” Dr. Götz observed. “But if a government acts in good faith and wants to solve this problem in society, then I think they could use this study to raise awareness and move to more intervention-based research.”

The researchers advocate for wider implementation of validated tools like the MIST in public education efforts and call for developing multilingual versions to enhance global understanding of misinformation vulnerability. As social media platforms continue evolving and artificial intelligence makes fake content increasingly sophisticated, understanding who is most at risk—and why—becomes essential for safeguarding information integrity in democratic societies.