Student chat

Your Ability to Detect Misinformation

Privacy Notice: Student names have been replaced with pseudonyms to protect privacy. The audio is AI-generated narration, not the students’ voices. Emoji reactions are illustrative. Plain transcript.

01Chat transcript

Guide

👋 Welcome, everyone!

Our topic is your ability to detect misinformation. We'll be discussing this statement:

While other people might be easily influenced by misinformation, I am confident in my own ability to evaluate information accurately.

Brianna agrees with the statement.
Jessica disagrees with the statement.

My name is Guide, and I'm here to support your discussion. If you need anything, start your message with "Hey Guide" 🤓

Brianna

Hey Jessica, why do you not feel confident in your ability to evaluate information accurately?

Jessica

Since this topic is more of a personal opinion, I view my skills in evaluating information on the lower side, so I disagree, as I'm not confident. I have learned skills to evaluate information from media to a research paper to find credibility and avoid fallacies. However, often times I see myself falling for or being influenced by misinformation and sometimes sharing that misinformation without knowing. I think how I view myself is similar to the Dunning-Kruger effect, where I have moderate expertise and experience in evaluating information accurately, but feel less confident in my abilities. In addition, if I hear information that is easy to absorb or simply makes sense, I tend to believe it without fact-checking.

Jessica

Also, I am less confident as I am a victim of the illusory effect of repetition. An example was during high school, when my classmates were spreading news about the Marvel Endgame movie. I am not a big follower of DC or Marvel, so I believed the news my classmates were spreading as true, as they had watched the movie, and so many were sharing the same fact. Spoiler not spoiler, I believed them when they said Aquaman died in Endgame. I believed this fact until the end of the school day, as when I told my friend about this new information, I learned that this was false news. Although this example might lean more towards trolling than misinformation, it doesn't change the fact that I chose to believe this false claim as truth without fact-checking before I shared. Despite having the skills to evaluate information through a quick Google search, I fell victim to misinformation more times than I'm proud of, which is why I am not confident in my abilities.

Jessica

How about you? Why are you confident in your abilities? And despite your confidence in your abilities, are you sometimes influenced by misinformation or not at all?

Brianna

Yes, I totally have been in a scenario where I have fallen victim to misinformation when I dont have much knowledge. With that though, I still feel confident in my abilities to evaluate for myself later. Especially in a group settings I think very thoroughly before I speak and really take in what others have to say.

Guide

Brianna, can you say more about what makes you confident despite acknowledging you've fallen victim to misinformation?

You mention evaluating "for yourself later" and thinking thoroughly in group settings. But Jessica described a similar pattern — she has skills to fact-check but often doesn't use them in the moment, which undermines her confidence.

What's the difference between your situation and Jessica's? Is it just that you're more forgiving of yourself for these lapses, or do you think there's something fundamentally different about how susceptible you are to misinformation compared to others?

Brianna

I also want to point out the difference in being influenced by misinformation compared to just taking it in. I actually think consuming misinformation could be helpful especially when forming your own thoughts. While it is inaccurate it could help you to build your own thoughts and even cement your side of an argument. I feel like this may be why I am confident in my abilities because I am placing a difference on being able to decipher what is misinformation and being influenced by it.

Jessica

What does it mean to be influenced by misinformation? Does it just mean to fall victim to misinformation, or is there something more?

Jessica

When I think of being influenced by misinformation, I just think of people sharing false information that can potentially be dangerous to themselves and others.

Brianna

Yes being influenced, to me is equivalent to falling victim. In other words being influenced is acting on or with misinformation. So that could be sharing it, that could be letting it lead you away from your original thoughts. But it's one thing to consume, it's another to let it influence.

Brianna

I believe we both agree in the heat of the moment you may not be able to identify misinformation as it is. But if you feel the need to revisit it, that should lead to strengthen your confidence in evaluating it. It shows that you heard, read, or saw something that wasn't quite right and allowed you to dig deeper. This can eventually lead to being able to identify it within the heat of the moment.

Guide

Jessica, how do you respond to Brianna's distinction between consuming misinformation and being influenced by it?

You shared the Aquaman example where you believed and shared false information — which by Brianna's definition means you were influenced, not just exposed. But Brianna seems confident she can consume misinformation without acting on it.

Do you think that distinction holds up? Or is the line between "consuming" and "being influenced" harder to draw than Brianna suggests?

Jessica

I think there is no hard line between "consuming" and "being influenced" by misinformation. Because sometimes you don't catch misinformation right away or even if a long time pass. Because sometimes we don't always go back and revaluate information we hear especially if it's misinformation that doesn't sound false or hasn't violated prior information we know to be true. What caught my attention in the book Age of Magical Overthinking, repetition help information digestion so when hearing information repeatedly a person can misinterprete the information as truth, "fluency as accuracy." Familiarity of what we know to be true can hinder our abilities to discern misinformation, until something triggers a response that signals "hey this sounds wrong," we won't actually go back and rethink information.

Brianna

so you're say we are still influenced by misinformation if we hear it multiple times?

Jessica

I think the book interpreted as if you hear misinformation enough at one point it might feel familiar and sound credible .

Guide

Brianna, does Jessica's point challenge your confidence at all?

She's suggesting that repetition can make misinformation feel true without us realizing it — we might not even know we need to "revisit" it because it never triggers our skepticism.

If that's right, how would you know whether you're just "consuming" misinformation versus actually being influenced by it without realizing?

Brianna

I guess this does challenge my confidence a little. But in a way I feel like if is talked about more that gives more opportunity to rethink and adjust. I get that repetition creates a feeling of truth but it could also bring about more skepticism.

Jessica

I agree if information is repeated enough maybe at some point someone would question it and rethink the information if its true or not. But if we can be influence by misinformation without being aware of it how can we catch it if it doesn't trigger any signals of skepticism. Like how can you catch misinformation if you don't know that it is?

Brianna

Yes, I totally get that can be hard. I guess for me now with everything I'm always skeptical on if it's real or fake and so I assume it's misinformation until otherwise proven.

Guide

Jessica, what do you make of Brianna's approach — assuming everything is misinformation until proven otherwise?

Does that strategy actually solve the problem you raised, or does it just shift the burden? If you're constantly skeptical of everything, how do you decide what's worth fact-checking and what to accept?

Jessica

I think Brianna's approach to assume information as false until proven otherwise is valid strategy against misinformation and being misled. But it does raise the question what information is worth checking. Because realistically you can't or more like you won't fact check everything you might hear, as you hear a lot of information daily. Therefore, Brianna's approach on misinformation might not be very realistic to the everyday/daily information. So how do you select which information to be skeptical about if it doesn't doesn't trigger any warning signs. Or in your case Brianna, if you treat all information with skepticism until proven otherwise what is your selective process to choose what information to fact check over the rest.

Jessica

or do you fact checking every information you hear?

Brianna

I don't fact check all information I'm given. I guess if it doesn't raise particularly any concern i'll fact check if I am interested, so there is some bias there.

Jessica

I know that you have to fact check a lot of political and medical information for instance. But how about information that are more interesting comments or stories like, "smelly peasants are the reason bridal bouquets exist" because they rarely bathe or information about a movie you haven't seen for instance. Would you fact-check or look further into these examples or would you ignore this kind of information as their is no real interest or value. As these one off misinformation aren't as dangerous as misinformation of politics or medicine.

Brianna

I would fact check information like that because it sparks curiosity. For movies if it's some sort of spoiler I will not look into it until I see the movie for myself because if it's not true I want to leave what actually happens a mystery until I see it.

Jessica

That is interesting. If curiosity helps guide or dictates your decision to fact check information and dig deeper for verification. How about facts that are uninteresting and less dramatic but also false. I can't name some on top of my head, maybe like goldfish having 3 second memory (common myth heard). But would uninteresting false information slip through your radar.👍

Brianna

Honestly probably, I guess when I answered the question I was making a clear distinction between being influenced and being able to tell what misinformation is. I see now there isn't really a clear different as you said!

02Understanding quiz

Sway asks each student five questions about what their partner argued. Scores are accurate. Questions and responses may be updated from time to time to reflect improvements to Sway.

Jessicadisagrees

Understanding Quiz

5 questions about what Brianna argued.

Early in the discussion, how did Brianna explain her confidence despite admitting that she can initially accept misinformation?

She emphasized that she can evaluate information later and thinks carefully before speaking in group settings.
She argued that prior knowledge usually prevents misinformation from affecting her judgment in group discussions.
She explained that she fact-checks information whenever it conflicts with another person's original position.
She claimed that frequent exposure makes questionable information easier for her to identify immediately.

correct Justification

Brianna said she still felt confident because she could "evaluate for myself later" and because in group settings she would "think very thoroughly before I speak." She did not claim that prior knowledge, repetition, or routine fact-checking prevented the initial lapse.

When you asked what it means to be influenced by misinformation, how did Brianna distinguish influence from mere consumption?

Influence meant questioning an inaccurate claim, while consumption meant using that claim to strengthen an argument.
Influence meant repeatedly encountering a claim, while consumption meant encountering that claim only once.
Influence meant finding a claim believable, while consumption meant remembering and repeating that claim later.
Influence meant acting on misinformation or changing your thoughts because of it, while consumption meant merely taking it in.

correct Justification

Brianna defined influence as "acting on or with misinformation," including sharing it or "letting it lead you away from your original thoughts." She contrasted that with merely consuming it: "it's one thing to consume, it's another to let it influence."

After the Guide raised your point that repetition may create belief without triggering skepticism, how did Brianna initially defend part of her confidence?

She reasoned that repeated discussion creates additional chances to reconsider a claim and may produce skepticism as well as familiarity.
She reasoned that repeated discussion matters mainly when a claim concerns politics, medicine, or another dangerous subject.
She reasoned that repeated discussion makes a claim easier to disprove because reliable sources become more widely available.
She reasoned that repeated discussion can be safely ignored when a person has already formed an original opinion.

correct Justification

Brianna acknowledged that the challenge affected her confidence "a little," but replied that if something "is talked about more" there are more opportunities "to rethink and adjust." She added that repetition "could also bring about more skepticism."

When you pressed Brianna about how she selects information to verify, what decision process did she describe?

She checked low-stakes claims only when they contradicted knowledge she had already verified from credible sources.
She checked claims that raised concern or sparked her interest, while recognizing that this introduced bias into her choices.
She checked claims mainly according to their potential harm, while postponing harmless claims until someone challenged them.
She checked unfamiliar claims discussed by groups, while accepting familiar claims that did not produce warning signs.

correct Justification

Brianna said, "if it doesn't raise particularly any concern i'll fact check if I am interested, so there is some bias there." She later said she would check an unusual historical claim because "it sparks curiosity," confirming that concern and interest guided her selection.

Toward the end of the discussion, why did Brianna revise her earlier distinction between identifying misinformation and being influenced by it?

She admitted that uninteresting falsehoods could escape her attention, showing that the two categories were not clearly separable.
She concluded that postponing movie spoilers showed that avoiding information is more reliable than evaluating it.
She accepted that curiosity removes selection bias by motivating people to verify both interesting and ordinary claims.
She decided that repeated misinformation becomes influential only when a person shares it with someone else.

correct Justification

When you asked whether uninteresting false information could "slip through" her radar, Brianna answered, "Honestly probably." She then explicitly revised her view: "I see now there isn't really a clear different as you said!" This connects her change to the possibility of being influenced without first identifying the misinformation.

5 of 5 correct Next

Briannaagrees

Understanding Quiz

5 questions about what Jessica argued.

At the beginning of the discussion, why did Jessica rate her ability to evaluate information on the lower side despite having learned evaluation skills?

She believed moderate expertise produces excessive confidence that prevents people from recognizing their mistakes.
She noticed that she sometimes accepts and shares plausible misinformation without using her fact-checking skills.
She thought limited knowledge of Marvel and DC made her generally unable to assess credible information.
She believed evaluation skills work for research papers but are less useful when checking media claims.

not quite Justification

Jessica explicitly contrasted having relevant skills with failing to apply them: "I have learned skills to evaluate information" but "often times I see myself falling for or being influenced by misinformation and sometimes sharing that misinformation without knowing." She also said plausible information can bypass checking: "if I hear information that is easy to absorb or simply makes sense, I tend to believe it without fact-checking."

When you distinguished consuming misinformation from being influenced by it, how did Jessica challenge the distinction?

She argued that unnoticed familiarity can make repeated information seem true before skepticism is ever triggered.
She argued that consumption is harmless when the claim concerns entertainment rather than medicine or politics.
She argued that influence occurs only after repeated claims directly contradict something a person already knows.
She argued that consumption becomes influence only when someone publicly shares the claim with another person.

correct Justification

Jessica said there is "no hard line" because people may not recognize misinformation or reevaluate it. She explained that repetition can produce "fluency as accuracy" and that "until something triggers a response that signals 'hey this sounds wrong,' we won't actually go back and rethink information."

After you suggested that repeated discussion could create more opportunities for skepticism, what was Jessica's response?

She rejected that repetition might prompt questioning, because familiar information becomes permanently resistant to later correction.
She accepted that skepticism solves unnoticed influence, but argued that it is mainly useful for political and medical claims.
She allowed that repetition might prompt questioning, but asked how unnoticed influence could be caught without a skeptical signal.
She agreed that repeated discussion reliably exposes falsehoods, but asked whether people have enough time to research them.

correct Justification

Jessica partly conceded your point: "if information is repeated enough maybe at some point someone would question it." She then preserved her challenge by asking, "if we can be influence by misinformation without being aware of it how can we catch it if it doesn't trigger any signals of skepticism."

How did Jessica assess your strategy of treating information as false until it is proven otherwise?

She considered it effective for entertainment claims but less useful for consequential political and medical information.
She considered it realistic only when curiosity provides a reason to investigate every claim encountered during the day.
She considered it valid in principle but unrealistic unless you can select which daily claims deserve fact-checking.
She considered it too skeptical because it prevents people from accepting even well-supported information as credible.

correct Justification

Jessica called it a "valid strategy against misinformation and being misled," but added that "you can't or more like you won't fact check everything" and asked what "selective process" you use. Thus, her concern was practical selection, not that skepticism has no value.

Why did Jessica introduce the example of the common myth that goldfish have a three-second memory?

She wanted to establish that repeated myths eventually create enough skepticism to make people verify them.
She wanted to test whether uninteresting false claims could escape checking when curiosity guides your attention.
She wanted to compare a harmless myth with political claims that people have a responsibility to investigate.
She wanted to show that familiar animal myths are more harmful than one-off misinformation about movies.

not quite Justification

Jessica connected the example directly to your curiosity-based method: "How about facts that are uninteresting and less dramatic but also false" and then asked whether "uninteresting false information" would "slip through your radar." The example tested a possible gap in your selection process.

3 of 5 correct Next

03Post-chat survey

Last, both students rate the statement again and then rate a randomly sampled subset of our post-chat survey items. Like their transcripts, individual student opinions are never revealed to instructors.

Jessicadisagrees

Now you’ve had a chance to discuss the topic, rate your level of agreement with the original statement again.

Remember, all responses to Sway surveys are private and never shown to your instructor.

While other people might be easily influenced by misinformation, I am confident in my own ability to evaluate information accurately.

Strongly disagree	Moderately disagree	Slightly disagree	No idea	Slightly agree	Moderately agree	Strongly agree

How much do you agree with each of these?

Statement	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
Guide treated me and my partner with equal respect
I felt comfortable sharing my honest opinions with my partner
It was valuable to chat with a student who did NOT share my perspective
It would be good if more students and classes used Sway
This discussion led me to change my mind about something related to the topic
The skills I practiced in this chat will be useful in my conversations outside of Sway

Submit

Briannaagrees

Now you’ve had a chance to discuss the topic, rate your level of agreement with the original statement again.

Remember, all responses to Sway surveys are private and never shown to your instructor.

While other people might be easily influenced by misinformation, I am confident in my own ability to evaluate information accurately.

Strongly disagree	Moderately disagree	Slightly disagree	No idea	Slightly agree	Moderately agree	Strongly agree

How much do you agree with each of these?

Statement	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neutral	Agree	Strongly Agree
I was not offended by my partner's perspective
My partner was genuinely trying to understand my perspective
This discussion improved my perception of my partner
It would be good if more students and classes used Sway
This discussion led me to change my mind about something related to the topic
The skills I practiced in this chat will be useful in my conversations outside of Sway

Submit

Opinion change

Jessicadisagrees

—

Briannaagrees

-2

before the chat after the chat both, unchanged

Your Ability to Detect Misinformation

01Chat transcript

02Understanding quiz

03Post-chat survey

Up next

All the chats

The student app

The research