Subscribe
The latest psychology and neuroscience discoveries.
My Account
  • Mental Health
  • Social Psychology
  • Cognitive Science
  • Psychopharmacology
  • Neuroscience
  • About
No Result
View All Result
PsyPost
PsyPost
No Result
View All Result
Home Exclusive Social Psychology Political Psychology

Political lies have a pattern — and radical-right populist parties are leading the charge

by Eric W. Dolan
April 16, 2025
in Political Psychology, Social Media
[Adobe Stock]

[Adobe Stock]

Share on TwitterShare on Facebook
Stay on top of the latest psychology findings: Subscribe now!

A new study published in The International Journal of Press/Politics suggests that political misinformation on social media is not a widespread product of all ideological camps or populist movements, but is instead disproportionately linked to radical-right populist parties. The researchers, based at the University of Amsterdam and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, analyzed over 32 million tweets from parliamentarians in 26 countries over a six-year period and found that radical-right populists are significantly more likely to share misinformation than their mainstream or left-wing counterparts.

The study was motivated by a shift in the academic understanding of misinformation. While early work focused heavily on the viral spread of low-quality information on social media platforms, more recent attention has turned toward the role of political elites. Politicians, particularly those with large platforms and loyal followers, have the ability to influence public opinion and shape discourse—making their online behavior a critical area of study. Yet, until now, there was limited cross-national evidence connecting political ideology to the spread of misinformation by elected officials.

“Misinformation is one of the most widely researched societal phenomena of our era, and is often seen as a severe threat to societal and democratic institutions. Yet, the drivers of the rise in misinformation remain contested,” explained study author Petter Törnberg, an associate professor at the Institute for Logic, Language and Computation and co-author of Seeing like a Platform: An Inquiry into the Condition of Digital Modernity.

“My coauthor and I realized we had something to contribute here. She is comparative political scientist, and I’m a computational social scientist. By combining our two approaches, we could study misinformation through a novel lens: as a political phenomenon and expression of party politics.”

Törnberg and his co-author Juliana Chueri assembled a massive database containing tweets from 8,198 parliamentarians across 26 democracies, including countries like Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The tweets, spanning from 2017 to 2022, included more than 18 million shared URLs. To identify misinformation, the team cross-referenced these links with two established databases: Media Bias/Fact Check and the Wikipedia Fake News list. These sources rate the factual reliability of media outlets on a scale from “very low” to “very high.”

From this, the researchers developed a “factuality score” for each political party, representing the average reliability of the sources their members shared. A low score indicated that a party’s members frequently shared links to unreliable or misleading sources. The team also gathered detailed information on each party’s ideological position using existing political science datasets, capturing whether a party leaned left or right, whether it embraced populist rhetoric, and whether it participated in government.

The central finding was that political ideology alone—or populism alone—did not predict whether a party would spread misinformation. Rather, it was the interaction of right-wing ideology and populist rhetoric that made a party more likely to share low-factuality content. Parties with high populism scores and a right-wing orientation were far more likely to disseminate misinformation than any other group. By contrast, left-wing populist parties and mainstream conservative or progressive parties did not show elevated levels of misinformation sharing.

While populism typically involves a distrust of elites and media, only its radical-right form was associated with low-factuality information sharing. Left-wing populists, who tend to focus on economic inequality and critique corporate power rather than cultural or national identity, did not engage in misinformation to the same extent.

“We were expecting misinformation to be linked to both left and right-wing populism. We however found that only radical right populism is predictive of misinformation spreading.”

This relationship held even after accounting for other factors like party cohesion, leadership style, and whether a party was in government or opposition. The study’s multilevel statistical models controlled for differences across countries, reinforcing the robustness of the findings.

One of the clearest illustrations came from the analysis of “party families” — political parties that share similar ideological foundations. Radical-right parties stood out with the lowest median factuality scores, significantly below those of socialist, green, liberal, and Christian democratic parties. Even when compared to other conservative parties, radical-right groups were far more likely to share links from sources known to publish misleading or false information.

The researchers argue that this pattern reflects the strategic use of misinformation as a political tool. Radical-right populists often seek to undermine trust in established institutions, including the media and the electoral system. By spreading misinformation, they can reinforce narratives of elite corruption, cultural threat, and institutional failure—ideas that are central to their political appeal. These tactics are especially effective in an attention-driven media environment, where provocative content is rewarded with engagement.

Importantly, the study emphasizes that this is not just a case of individual politicians behaving irresponsibly. Rather, it points to a structural alignment between radical-right populist ideology and the incentives of the digital media landscape. Misinformation becomes part of the broader political strategy, used to mobilize supporters, discredit opponents, and dominate media coverage.

“I think there’s a common understanding of misinformation as just an expression of our current media ecosystem: the quality of information is declining due to social media. Our study shows that this might not be the right way to think about misinformation. Instead, it appears to be a political phenomenon – linked to the rise of radical right populist politicians during the last decade, who are drawing on misinformation as a political strategy.”

Despite its scope and insights, the study is not without limitations. It only covers content shared on Twitter between 2017 and 2022, and future research will be needed to examine newer platforms and more recent trends. The analysis also focuses on shared URLs rather than the content of tweet texts themselves, potentially missing other forms of misinformation. Additionally, while the study included a diverse set of Western democracies, it does not provide insights into how misinformation operates in non-Western or authoritarian contexts.

Still, the findings open the door for a new approach to studying misinformation—not just as a media or technology problem, but as a phenomenon embedded in party politics. By making their data publicly available, the researchers hope to encourage future work that further explores the role of ideology, party strategy, and global political dynamics in the spread of false information.

Ultimately, this research reframes the conversation around misinformation. Rather than treating it as an unfortunate byproduct of social media, the findings suggest that misinformation is often a deliberate and calculated political tactic.

“We hope to establish a comparative approach to studying misinformation, in which we develop an understanding of misinformation as inextricably interlinked with political parties and movements. To address the caveats mentioned above, we are currently working on a larger-scale project, in which we study misinformation spread from virtually all the political parties in the world and use AI-techniques to identify misinformation and misleading information. We believe this will give us a much richer understanding of the global architecture of political misinformation.”

The study, “When Do Parties Lie? Misinformation and Radical-Right Populism Across 26 Countries,” was published January 13, 2025.

TweetSendScanShareSendPinShareShareShareShareShare

RELATED

New psychology study sheds light on mysterious “feelings of presence” during isolation
Political Psychology

People who think “everyone agrees with me” are more likely to support populism

July 1, 2025

People who wrongly believe that most others share their political views are more likely to support populist ideas, according to a new study. These false beliefs can erode trust in democratic institutions and fuel resentment toward political elites.

Read moreDetails
Scientists show how you’re unknowingly sealing yourself in an information bubble
Cognitive Science

Scientists show how you’re unknowingly sealing yourself in an information bubble

June 29, 2025

Scientists have found that belief polarization doesn’t always come from misinformation or social media bubbles. Instead, it often begins with a simple search. Our choice of words—and the algorithm’s response—can subtly seal us inside our own informational comfort zones.

Read moreDetails
Radical leaders inspire stronger devotion because they make followers feel significant, study finds
Political Psychology

Radical leaders inspire stronger devotion because they make followers feel significant, study finds

June 28, 2025

A new study finds that voters are more motivated by radical political leaders than moderates, because supporting bold causes makes them feel personally significant—driving greater activism, sacrifice, and long-term engagement across elections in the United States and Poland.

Read moreDetails
TikTok tics study sheds light on recovery trends and ongoing mental health challenges
Body Image and Body Dysmorphia

TikTok and similar platforms linked to body dissatisfaction and eating disorder symptoms

June 27, 2025

Frequent use of platforms like TikTok and YouTube Shorts is linked to disordered eating symptoms among teens, according to new research. The study found that body comparisons and dissatisfaction may help explain this troubling association—especially among girls.

Read moreDetails
Loneliness skews partner perceptions, harming relationships and reinforcing isolation
Mental Health

Maximization style and social media addiction linked to relationship obsessive compulsive disorder

June 24, 2025

Researchers have identified connections between obsessive thoughts about relationships, emotional closeness, and habits like social media addiction and striving for perfection. The findings highlight risk factors that can deepen doubt and tension in romantic connections, especially when conflict is present.

Read moreDetails
It’s not digital illiteracy: Here’s why older adults are drawn to dubious news
Social Media

Believing “news will find me” is linked to sharing fake news, study finds

June 22, 2025

People who rely on social media to “stumble upon” news are more prone to spreading misinformation, according to a new longitudinal study.

Read moreDetails
Political ambivalence has a surprising relationship with support for violence
Authoritarianism

New study sheds light on the psychological roots of collective violence

June 21, 2025

A new study from Lebanon finds that people with authoritarian beliefs tend to oppose violence against political leaders, while those high in social dominance orientation are more likely to support violence against rival group members.

Read moreDetails
Epistemic mistrust and dogmatism predict preference for authoritarian-looking leaders
Authoritarianism

Epistemic mistrust and dogmatism predict preference for authoritarian-looking leaders

June 20, 2025

A new study suggests that the way people learn to trust others early in life can shape their political ideology and preference for strong, dominant leaders—though not directly, but through dogmatic thinking and broader political attitudes.

Read moreDetails

SUBSCRIBE

Go Ad-Free! Click here to subscribe to PsyPost and support independent science journalism!

STAY CONNECTED

LATEST

Ketogenic diet raises brain blood flow by 22% and BDNF by 47% in new study

Small folds in the brain may hold key insights into Alzheimer’s and aging-related cognitive decline

New research suggests interparental conflict can spill over into a mother’s parenting style

Creativity in autism may stem from co-occurring ADHD, not autism itself

Cannabis oil might help with drug-resistant epilepsy, study suggests

New brain stimulation method shows promise for treating mood, anxiety, and trauma disorders

Peppermint tea boosts memory and attention—but why?

Psychedelic compound blurs boundary between self and others in the brain, study finds

         
       
  • Contact us
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms and Conditions
[Do not sell my information]

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Add New Playlist

Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Cognitive Science Research
  • Mental Health Research
  • Social Psychology Research
  • Drug Research
  • Relationship Research
  • About PsyPost
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy