Why political polarisation can make citizens more vulnerable to disinformation

Every week, social media users encounter viral claims about health, economics, technology or politics shared by influencers, commentators, or self-proclaimed experts. Some promise simple explanations for complex problems, while others claim to reveal information that mainstream media or public institutions allegedly want to hide. Many of these messages spread rapidly despite lacking evidence, relying on misleading interpretations of reality, or presenting highly selective accounts of events.

Their success raises an important question: why are false narratives so persuasive when reliable information is readily available?

A common assumption is that disinformation succeeds because people lack information or fail to verify what they read online. However, research progressively suggests that the issue is more complex. In highly connected societies, citizens are often exposed to more information than ever before. The challenge is not necessarily a lack of information, but rather how individuals select and interpret the information they find. As Wardle and Derakhshan (2017) argue, the contemporary information environment is characterised not only by the circulation of false information but also by the growing difficulty citizens face in distinguishing trustworthy sources from misleading ones.

Recent research points to political polarisation as one of the key factors shaping these processes. Citizens do not approach information as neutral observers. Instead, they interpret facts through identities, emotions and social affiliations that influence what they consider credible and whom they choose to trust. As a result, information that aligns with pre-existing beliefs is often accepted more readily than information that challenges them. This relationship between identity, trust and information has become increasingly relevant in contemporary democracies and is central to understanding why disinformation can flourish even in societies with high levels of education and access to information.

Polarisation is about more than political disagreement

A recent monographic issue of the Revista CENTRA de Ciencias Sociales dedicated to political polarisation provides valuable insights into how ideological, identity-based and affective divisions are reshaping political life in Spain.

According to Llera (2025), political polarisation should not be understood solely as a growing ideological distance between citizens or political parties. It is a multidimensional phenomenon that also includes emotional, behavioural and social dimensions. This distinction is important because political disagreement is a normal feature of democratic societies. Democracies depend on debate, competition and the coexistence of different viewpoints.

The problem emerges when disagreement evolves into distrust and when political identities become central to how individuals interpret reality. The Spanish case illustrates this evolution particularly well. Miller-Moya (2025) shows that ideological polarisation continues to structure political competition in Spain, while León-Ranero (2025) highlights the growing importance of identity-based polarisation.

Citizens increasingly perceive political conflicts not simply as disagreements over public policy but as conflicts between groups with different values, identities and visions of society. In such contexts, political affiliation becomes more than a matter of electoral preference; it becomes an important component of personal and collective identity.

Digital environments can reinforce existing divisions

These developments have significant implications for how information is consumed. When political identities become stronger, people tend to favour information that supports what they already believe and avoid information that contradicts it. This tendency, often associated with selective exposure and confirmation bias, has become especially relevant in digital environments where individuals can choose from an almost unlimited number of information sources.

Social media platforms facilitate the creation of personalised information ecosystems in which users are repeatedly exposed to similar viewpoints, while alternative perspectives become less visible. International research has identified this dynamic as an important factor in contemporary political communication. Tucker et al. (2018) argue that digital media do not automatically create polarisation, but they can reinforce existing divisions by making it easier for individuals to consume information that aligns with their political preferences. Over time, these patterns may contribute to the emergence of fragmented information environments in which citizens rely on different sources, trust different government authorities and develop increasingly divergent understandings of reality.