Evaluating Tweets Reduces the Influence of Inaccurate Content, but Does "Liking" a Tweet Reflect Evaluation?

Evaluative mindsets can reduce the influence of inaccurate information on subsequent judgments. But while people regularly self-report accuracy as crucial for their information-seeking activities and reputations, contemporary discussions of social media experiences suggest such considerations are not guaranteed. We examined whether evaluative benefits emerge for information embedded in social media posts, and whether decisions central to social media experiences can reflect evaluative considerations. In two experiments, participants read Tweets containing potentially inaccurate information, afterward answering questions related to the Tweet contents. Experiment 1 replicated the previous findings: Incorrect responses were more likely after reading inaccurate than accurate or filler Tweets. In Experiment 2, judging Tweets for accuracy reduced participants' reproductions of inaccurate ideas as compared to judging Tweets for interest or for whether one would "like" the contents. Self-report data indicated participants who identified accuracy as important while reading Tweets showed benefits even when not explicitly tasked with making accuracy assessments.