Meredith Wallace

Abstract: This study aims to investigate the correlation between existing opinions on COVID-19 vaccines and an individual’s ability to identify and accurately interpret deceptive graphs on the topic. Existing research has examined confirmation bias in the interpretation of non-deceptive graphs and the impacts of deceptive graphs on viewers interpretations of non-controversial data sets, but little research has looked at deceptive graphs in combination with a polarizing topic. The survey used a compressed y-axis graph, inappropriate data selection graph, and dual axis graph and looked at participant’s interpretations of the graphs in relationship to their COVID-19 vaccine opinions. There were 79 responses from US adults to the survey. Overall, the compressed y-axis graph showed evidence of both deception and confirmation bias playing a role. The inappropriate data selection graph showed consistent evidence of deception across all groups, and the dual axis graph showed little evidence of deception but did show evidence of confirmation bias in identification. If these results were replicated with more consistency in a larger scale study, it could indicate that deceptive graphs can act as misinformation and confirmation bias leads to people being less critical of graphs that align with their existing opinion, which is very important to consider in the polarized political climate of the US. The results of the study were not consistent enough to draw solid conclusions, but the evidence indicates that more research is needed to understand the role that confirmation bias plays in deceptive graph interpretation.