Declining trust in facts, institutions imposes real costs on U.S. society

The study cites the immigration debate as a present-day example of the erosion of civil discourse. Without agreement on a common set of facts about the number of immigrants entering the United States, their economic costs and contributions, and the amount of crime they do or do not commit, it becomes difficult to have important policy debates and come to policy solutions.

“Increasingly, important policy debates are as likely to hinge on opinion or anecdote as they are on objective facts or rigorous analysis,” said RAND political scientist and report co-author Jennifer Kavanagh. “However, policy decisions made mostly on the basis of opinion or anecdote—when more rigorous information is available or can be developed—can have deleterious effects on American democracy.”

“One of the reasons for tackling Truth Decay is that its four constituent trends might imperil RAND’s mission of helping to improve policy and decision making through research and analysis,” Rich said. “Because we believe in and are committed to this mission, we hope that exploring Truth Decay and understanding its drivers and consequences will allow us to reduce any negative effects that these changes could have at the national and individual levels while continuing to pursue our institutional objectives.”

RAND notes that RAND researchers are continuing to analyze three Truth Decay-related trends in American life: the changing mix of opinion and objective reporting in journalism, the decline in public trust in major institutions, and initiatives to improve media literacy in light of “fake news.”

“We urge individuals and organizations to join with us in promoting the need for facts, data and analysis in civic and political discourse—and in American public life,” Rich said. “The challenge posed by Truth Decay is great, but the stakes are too high to permit inaction.”

Key findings
What is Truth Decay?

· Truth Decay is defined as a set of four related trends: increasing disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data; a blurring of the line between opinion and fact; an increase in the relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion and personal experience over fact; and declining trust in formerly respected sources of factual information.

Is Truth Decay new?

· This report explores three historical eras — the 1890s, 1920s, and 1960s — for evidence of the four Truth Decay trends and compares those eras with the past two decades (2000s–2010s). Two of the four trends occurred in earlier periods: the blurring of the line between opinion and fact and an increase in the relative volume, and resulting influence, of opinion over fact. Declining trust in institutions, while evident in previous eras, is more severe today. No evidence of an increase in disagreement about facts and analytical interpretations of facts and data was seen in the earlier periods.

What causes Truth Decay?

· Four drivers, or causes, of Truth Decay are described: cognitive bias, changes in the information system (including the rise of social media and the 24-hour news cycle), competing demands on the educational system that limit its ability to keep pace with changes in the information system, and political, sociodemographic, and economic polarization. Various agents also amplify Truth Decay’s trends.

What are the consequences?

· The consequences of Truth Decay manifest in many ways. The most damaging effects might be the erosion of civil discourse, political paralysis, alienation and disengagement of individuals from political and civic institutions, and uncertainty about U.S. policy.

Recommendations
Unraveling the complex system of Truth Decay will require multifaceted and interdisciplinary efforts

· Interdisciplinary research and cooperation among research organizations, policymakers, educators, and other stakeholders will be necessary to shed light on the problem of Truth Decay and to develop a clearer understanding of the problem and devise possible solutions.

There are four high-priority areas of research

· Examine more closely how Truth Decay has manifested in the past at home and abroad, extracting lessons that can assist in the fight against Truth Decay.

· Further explore Truth Decay trends, including such areas as how media content has changed over time, the ways in which the speed and nature of information flow have evolved, developments in the education system and its curricula, the ways in which polarization and political gridlock have (or have not) worsened, the erosion of civil discourse and engagement, and changes in the severity of uncertainty about U.S. policy.

· Investigate the processes and mechanisms that connect Truth Decay to information dissemination, processing, and consumption; institutions, authorities, and intermediaries; polarization, engagement, and discourse; the benefits and challenges of technological advancement; and agency. Truth Decay as an interconnected system should also be explored.

· Finally, develop and evaluate potential solutions and mitigations to the problems caused by Truth Decay. Priority areas include educational interventions; improving the information market; institutional development and rebuilding; bridging social divides; harnessing new technologies; behavioral economics, psychology, and cognitive science; and organizational self-assessment.

— Read more in by Jennifer Kavanagh and Michael D. Rich, Truth Decay: An Initial Exploration of the Diminishing Role of Facts and Analysis in American Public Life (RAND Corporation, January 2018)