This study examines how media consumption shapes individuals’ ability to distinguish true from false information and their response biases in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Drawing on signal detection theory, it analyzes sensitivity (the ability to discern truth from falsehood) and absolute response bias (the strength of the tendency to accept or reject claims) separately. Data come from a survey conducted in 19 European and American countries (N = 19,037) in 2022 during Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine. Reliance on newspapers is linked to higher sensitivity for both pro- and anti-Russia statements, whereas television news shows no such effect. Social media use is unrelated to sensitivity, but corresponds with more balanced evaluations, while messenger-base...
This study examines how media consumption shapes individuals’ ability to distinguish true from false information and their response biases in the context of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Drawing on signal detection theory, it analyzes sensitivity (the ability to discern truth from falsehood) and absolute response bias (the strength of the tendency to accept or reject claims) separately. Data come from a survey conducted in 19 European and American countries (N = 19,037) in 2022 during Russia’s full-scale war against Ukraine. Reliance on newspapers is linked to higher sensitivity for both pro- and anti-Russia statements, whereas television news shows no such effect. Social media use is unrelated to sensitivity, but corresponds with more balanced evaluations, while messenger-based news consumption predicts lower sensitivity and stronger biases. In some cases, alternative media use is also associated with increased response bias. Cross-national comparisons show that press freedom is linked to higher sensitivity to pro-Russia claims and to asymmetric response biases for pro- and anti-Russia frames, consistent with dominant media narratives.