Fact-checking is not enough; what we really need is a 'mental vaccine': An AI book review of 'Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity'

Have you ever come across a post on your social media timeline recently and wondered, 'Is this actually true?'

As someone who works in the medical field, I open social media almost every day, and I feel like I'm increasingly finding myself questioning the authenticity of health information and news.

'I'm calm and rational, so I'll be fine'—there was a time when I thought that, too.

However, after encountering a study from the University of Cambridge, I had to change my way of thinking.

The human brain is more vulnerable to fake news than we imagine.

And, as it turns out, a scientific method to overcome this has already been discovered.

The brain is a 'prediction machine,' which is why we get deceived

As I continue my studies as a certified psychologist, one book that shocked me the most was 'Foolproof: Why Misinformation Infects Our Minds and How to Build Immunity' by Professor Sander van der Linden of the University of Cambridge.

The author views misinformation as a 'virus,' the human mind as a 'host,' and social media as the 'transmission route'.

When I first read it, I felt it was quite an exaggerated metaphor.

However, as I continued reading, I realized that this was not just a metaphor, but a description of the reality of modern society itself.

This is because incidents where fake news has actually led to casualties have been reported all over the world.

Communication towers were set on fire due to the hoax that '5G signals spread COVID-19,' and an armed man stormed a shop based on the false rumor that it was a hub for child trafficking.

The problem of information is no longer confined to the screen.

Faced with this fact, I felt a chill run down my spine.

Three cognitive biases that cause us to be deceived

So why do people believe misinformation so easily?

After reading this book, I organized the reasons into three 'brain biases.'

The first is the 'illusory truth effect'.

Humans have a tendency to perceive information they see repeatedly as 'likely to be true'.

This is because information we are exposed to repeatedly is easier for the brain to process.

The brain mistakes this 'processing fluency' for evidence of 'truth'.

It is strange, but information that initially seemed 'suspicious' can, after appearing on your timeline repeatedly, eventually change into something you think, 'Well, maybe that's true.'

I myself have had the experience of being skeptical about a certain health method at first, only to start believing it a little after seeing it repeatedly.

The second is motivated reasoning.

This is the idea that while people appear to be judging information from a neutral standpoint, they are actually choosing conclusions that align with their own desires for how things 'should be'.

We find it easy to accept information that fits our beliefs or the interests of the groups we belong to, while harshly criticizing information that contradicts them.

What is interesting here is that research results show that when people are told they will be 'rewarded for getting the right answer,' partisan bias decreases and accuracy rates improve.

In other words, we don't get things wrong because we don't know; sometimes we 'choose to remain ignorant of the truth.'

When I read this passage, I felt it overlapped with my own observations in clinical practice.

People unconsciously look away from information that shakes their identity.

The third is the continued influence effect of misinformation.

This is a phenomenon where, even after misinformation that was once believed is later debunked, the influence remains and persists.

Human memory does not store facts as a list, but rather constructs the causal relationships of events as a narrative.

Simply removing the misinformation creates an 'explanatory gap' in that narrative.

Consequently, the brain continues to use information it knows to be incorrect in order to keep the story consistent.

That feeling of lingering unease even after being told, 'That was a mistake.'

There was a cognitive background to that feeling.

The truth is complex, lies are simple—this asymmetry is the root of the problem.

There is another important perspective that van der Linden points out.

It is that lies and fake news are simple and sticky, whereas scientific facts are nuanced and complex.

For example, a simple claim like 'this food prevents cancer' enters the mind instantly.

On the other hand, the moment people hear that 'the association between specific foods and disease risk needs to be carefully evaluated in large-scale cohort studies that control for multiple confounding factors,' their brains shut down.

This asymmetry is exactly what I feel keenly in the medical field.

The more one tries to convey correct information, the longer and more complex the explanation becomes.

And patients or their families may reach for simple misinformation in search of 'an easier, more effective method'.

This is not laziness, but a manifestation of the natural energy-saving function of the human brain.

I believe that what should be blamed is not the individual, but the structure itself.

A paradigm shift called 'mental vaccine'

Some readers may have felt gloomy after reading this far.

But what makes this book wonderful is that it properly presents a prescription.

That is the concept of prebunking.

Just as medical vaccinations introduce a weakened virus into the body to build immunity, the idea is to cultivate the power to resist real misinformation when encountered by pre-exposing the mind to 'weakened misinformation' and the logic of its refutation.

When I read this, I couldn't help but slap my knee in agreement.

Fact-checking is like 'treatment' that corrects misinformation that has already spread.

But what was really needed was 'prevention'—building immunity before infection.

In the online game Bad News developed by van der Linden and others, players act as fake news spreaders themselves, experiencing tactics like inciting emotions and impersonation 'from the inside'.

It turns out that after playing for just a few minutes, the ability to spot misinformation improves significantly, and the effect lasts for several months.

Simulating 'the villain's tactics' becomes the best vaccine.

It is paradoxical, but this is the conclusion shown by modern science.

Three 'immunity-boosting habits' to keep in mind in daily life

Finally, I would like to share three small habits that I keep in mind in my daily life.

The first is to 'pause whenever your emotions are strongly stirred.'

Fear, anger, righteous indignation—if you encounter a post that strongly shakes these emotions, it might be content intentionally set up by someone.

The author cites 'Emotion' as one of the manipulation techniques for misinformation.

When my emotions are stirred, I put my smartphone down for a moment.

It is not too late to press the share button after that.

The second is to 'focus on the manipulation tactics rather than individual facts.'

It is not realistic to fact-check every single thing by asking, 'Is this true or false?'

Instead, it is much more universally useful to remember the patterns often used by misinformation—disparaging the sender, inciting polarization, impersonating experts, hinting at conspiracies.

It is the same as being able to deal with a virus even if it mutates, as long as you can identify its common structure.

The third is to 'question the information you want to believe even more.'

'Motivated reasoning' is at work within everyone.

I myself tend to be lenient when it comes to information related to my own field of expertise or political stance.

That is why I make it a habit to ask myself, 'Am I believing this just because I want to believe it?'

This is by no means a pleasant question to ask.

But I feel that the courage to acknowledge the bugs in one's own cognition is, in the end, the strongest immunity.

Conclusion

Gandhi is often quoted as saying, 'Live as if you were to die tomorrow. Learn as if you were to live forever.'

However, it seems that this is not actually a quote from Gandhi.

The anecdote the author introduces at the beginning of this book allows us to experience firsthand just how easily we can believe misinformation.

Let me conclude by reviewing the points I wanted to share with you today.

First, the human brain has three quirks—the 'illusory truth effect,' 'motivated reasoning,' and the 'continued influence effect'—making everyone susceptible to misinformation.

Second, misinformation is a real-world threat that spreads like a virus, designed to stir emotions and be easily shared.

Third, the key to a solution is not post-fact correction (fact-checking), but pre-emptive psychological vaccination (prebunking).

Fourth, by paying attention to three things—strong emotions, manipulation tactics, and information we want to believe—we can boost our 'immunity' on a daily basis.

Fifth, vaccinating your own mind is also a democratic act that protects your family, friends, and community.

There is no need to aim for perfect information literacy.

Simply by knowing the quirks of your own brain and developing the habit of pausing, we can definitely change.

Within you, there is already the power to learn, the power to question, and the power to care.

By using these just a little more consciously, you should be able to become a resilient person who is not easily swayed by misinformation.

Thank you very much for staying with me until the end. I hope today's article serves as a catalyst for you to think about your next steps.

#FakeNews #InformationLiteracy #Psychology #MediaLiteracy #CertifiedPublicPsychologist

The original version of this book can be found here.