Replication data for: The Effect of Fact-Checking on Elites: A Field Experiment on U.S. State Legislators

Does external monitoring improve democratic performance? Fact-checking has come to play an increasingly important role in political coverage in the United States, but some research suggests it may be ineffective at reducing public misperceptions about controversial issues. However, fact-checking might instead help improve political discourse by increasing the reputational costs or risks of spreading misinformation for political elites. To evaluate this deterrent hypothesis, we conducted a field experiment on a diverse group of state legislators from nine U.S. states in the months before the November 2012 election. In the experiment, a randomly assigned subset of state legislators were sent a series of letters about the risks to their reputation and electoral security if they are caught making questionable statements. The legislators who were sent these letters were substantially less likely to receive a negative fact-checking rating or to have their accuracy questioned publicly, suggesting that fact-checking can reduce inaccuracy when it poses a salient threat.外部监督能否提升民主表现？事实核查（fact-checking）在美国政治报道中的作用愈发重要，但部分研究显示，其在减少公众对争议性议题的错误认知方面或难见成效。然而，事实核查或可通过提升政治精英传播错误信息所需承担的声誉成本与风险，助力改善政治话语环境。为验证这一威慑假说，我们于2012年11月美国大选前的数月间，针对来自美国9个州的多元化州议员群体开展了一项田野实验。实验中，随机选取的一部分州议员收到了系列信函，信函告知其若被查实发表可疑言论，将面临声誉与选举安全层面的风险。相较未收到信函的议员，收到此类信函的州议员获得负面事实核查评级或被公开质疑言论准确性的概率显著更低，这表明当事实核查构成显著威胁时，其可有效减少不实言论的传播。