Which Linguistic Cues Make People Fall for Fake News? A Comparison of Cognitive and Affective Processing
Bernhard Lutz, Marc T. P. Adam, Stefan Feuerriegel, Nicolas Pröllochs, Dirk Neumann
Abstract
Fake news on social media has large, negative implications for society. However, little is known about what linguistic cues make people fall for fake news and, hence, how to design effective countermeasures for social media. In this study, we seek to understand which linguistic cues make people fall for fake news. Linguistic cues (e.g., adverbs, personal pronouns, positive emotion words, negative emotion words) are important characteristics of any text and also affect how people process real vs. fake news. Specifically, we compare the role of linguistic cues across both cognitive processing (related to careful thinking) and affective processing (related to unconscious automatic evaluations). To this end, we performed a within-subject experiment where we collected neurophysiological measurements of 42 subjects while these read a sample of 40 real and fake news articles. During our experiment, we measured cognitive processing through eye fixations, and affective processing in situ through heart rate variability. We find that users engage more in cognitive processing for longer fake news articles, while affective processing is more pronounced for fake news written in analytic words. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work studying the role of linguistic cues in fake news processing. Altogether, our findings have important implications for designing online platforms that encourage users to engage in careful thinking and thus prevent them from falling for fake news.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext cb924d51-c1b2-467a-95fc-47258063a2caCited by top-tier papers2
- Comparing the Willingness to Share for Human-generated vs. AI-generated Fake NewsAmirsiavosh Bashardoust, Stefan Feuerriegel, Yash Raj ShresthaCSCW 2024 · 28 citations
- The News Says, the Bot Says: How Immigrants and Locals Differ in Chatbot-Facilitated News ReadingYongle Zhang, Phuong-Anh Nguyen-Le, Kriti Singh, Ge GaoCHI 2025 · 5 citations
Builds on6
- Countering Fake News: A Comparison of Possible Solutions Regarding User Acceptance and EffectivenessJan Kirchner, Christian ReuterCSCW 2020 · 89 citations
- The Effects of AI-based Credibility Indicators on the Detection and Spread of Misinformation under Social InfluenceZhuoran Lu, Patrick Li, Weilong Wang, Ming YinCSCW 2022 · 55 citations
- Reviewing Interventions to Address Misinformation: The Need to Expand Our Vision Beyond an Individualistic FocusZhila Aghajari, Eric P. S. Baumer, Dominic DiFranzoCSCW 2023 · 48 citations
- Diffusion of Community Fact-Checked Misinformation on TwitterChiara Patricia Drolsbach, Nicolas PröllochsCSCW 2023 · 47 citations
- Mechanisms of True and False Rumor Sharing in Social Media: Collective Intelligence or Herd Behavior?Nicolas Pröllochs, Stefan FeuerriegelCSCW 2023 · 31 citations
Related papers
- Mining Dual Emotion for Fake News DetectionXueyao Zhang, Juan Cao, Xirong Li, Qiang Sheng et al.WWW 2021 · 332 citations
- Understanding News Consumers' Perceptions of Believability: A Study of Real and Fake NewsMostofa Najmus Sakib, Md Shoaib Ahmed, Francesca Spezzano, Anne HambyCSCW 2025 · 1 citation
- That's Fake News! Reliability of News When Provided Title, Image, Source Bias & Full ArticleFrancesca Spezzano, Anu Shrestha, Jerry Alan Fails, Brian W. StoneCSCW 2021 · 22 citations
- Causal Intervention and Counterfactual Reasoning for Multi-modal Fake News DetectionZiwei Chen, Linmei Hu, Weixin Li, Yingxia Shao et al.ACL 2023 · 46 citations
- Contextualizing Misinformation: A User-Centric Approach to Linguistic and Topical Patterns in News ConsumptionRoss Dahlke, Fangjing Tu, Yi-Chia Wang, Yingdan Lu et al.CSCW 2025 · 2 citations
