Truthiness: Why Do Ideas Spread

We often share ideas before subjecting them to verification or critical thinking

I will forever remember a childhood riddle I didn't manage to solve. What is the fastest thing in the world? I stood there, stumped and answered a rocket. The answer was: an idea.

The act of sharing ideas, deeply embedded in our species' history, is not a random occurrence. It reflects our social nature, cognitive shortcuts, and the balance we have to make between emotion and information. Today I look at idea propagation, and how our ancient evolutionary inclinations interplay with the modern digital age to shape the narratives that envelop us.

Truthiness

We tend to be less concerned about the truth of ideas before they spread, than with the fact that we want to share or receive the idea ASAP.

"Truthiness" is a term coined by comedian Stephen Colbert on his show "The Colbert Report."

It refers to the quality of an idea or statement feeling true or credible based on gut feelings, intuition, or emotional resonance rather than factual evidence or logical reasoning.

In essence, truthiness is the sense that something is true because it feels right or aligns with one's beliefs, even if there is little or no concrete evidence to support it.

Truthiness gained attention in the era of social media and the proliferation of information. In the digital age, information spreads rapidly, and individuals often encounter content that aligns with their existing beliefs or emotions.

This can lead to the acceptance and sharing of ideas that are emotionally appealing but lack factual support.

From a psychological perspective, confirmation bias is when people seek information that aligns with their existing beliefs while disregarding contradictory evidence.

This bias came from two human drives in ancient times:

• the need to make quick decisions because they were crucial for survival

• the need to belong and conform within our social groups

These behaviours served as a mechanism to strengthen group identity and cooperation, increasing the chances of survival.

Why We Like Ideas We Agree With

Emotional Resonance

Evolutionarily, emotions helped us make quick decisions and survive. Emotionally charged content can trigger the brain's reward system, promoting sharing and engagement. Research suggests that emotionally arousing content tends to be more memorable and shareable (Berger & Milkman, 2012). Think of all the online posts of pleas, sympathy inducing acts or big gifting. Admit it, it brings out a few tears.

Cognitive Bias Confirmation

Politicians use phrases like "standing up for traditional values" or "protecting our way of life." These ideas can activate confirmation bias and rally like-minded individuals.

People tend to favor ideas that align with their existing beliefs to maintain cognitive consistency (Nickerson, 1998).

Social Identity and Group Dynamics

Radical online movements focus on creating a common identity, such as being part of a united community or standing against a common "enemy."

Humans have evolved to be social beings, and group membership provided survival advantages in ancestral environments. The need for social belonging and identity is a fundamental human drive (Baumeister & Leary, 1995).

Lack of Critical Thinking: The Stupidity of Sharing

Humans evolved to conserve mental energy when making decisions in order to survive. This tendency can lead to short-cut thinking, where quick judgments are made based on limited information. The heuristic (quick thinking) approach to sharing content online reflects an evolutionary bias toward conserving cognitive energy (Kahneman, 2011).

The politician might rely on simple, easily digestible messages. By using straightforward statements and avoiding complex details, they can cater to a broader audience while minimizing the need for deep critical evaluation.

Fear of Missing Out (FOMO): Ideas of Trendiness

In ancestral environments, being excluded from important events or resources could be dangerous. This fear-driven motivation to stay connected and informed explains our need for 24h news channels and online message platforms and newsfeeds. (Neuberg et al., 2011).

Simplification and Memes: The Art of Idea

The cognitive economy principle: the brain seeks to process information efficiently. Simplification of complex ideas into memes or bite-sized content makes the brain happy. No effort is the easy way for our brain to digest an idea, however, memes are often understood in cultural chunks. These chunks are almost always biased and don't involve critical thinking. (Cosmides & Tooby, 1996).

Lack of Attention: The Scroll and Share

Today we all lack the attention and time. We are overstimulated and that costs our brains its cognitive resources. Evolutionarily, individuals had to efficiently spread their attention to potential threats in their environment. In the digital age, our brains have to keep up with electrically powered information sources, and we simply get too tired to scrutinise before sharing the idea.

From emotional tugs at heartstrings to the allure of "click-baits," our brains have evolved to embrace the rapid and the resonant. The sheer speed with which ideas catch fire across screens lighting up the globe is a survival strategy dressed in a digital cloak.

Just be aware of the threads that make us creatures of connection, story, and, yes, a touch of the unverified but oh-so-tempting tale.

References:

Colbert, S. (2005, October 17). The Colbert Report. Comedy Central: https://www.cc.com/video/93n9ks/the-colbert-report-the-word-truthiness

Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175-220.

Cialdini, R. B. (1984). Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion. Harper Collins.

Berger, J., & Milkman, K. L. (2012). What Makes Online Content Viral? Journal of Marketing Research, 49(2), 192-205.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Schultz, W. (2000). Multiple reward signals in the brain. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 1(3), 199-207.