Exploring the impact of online misinformation on ideological polarisation and institutional distrust: an integrative review and strategic framework for counteraction

Overview

This integrative review examines the relationship between online misinformation and two critical democratic outcomes: ideological polarization and institutional distrust. The study synthesizes evidence from 157 publications to establish empirical pathways linking misinformation exposure to these phenomena and proposes a framework for strategic intervention.

Methods and approach

An integrative review methodology was employed to systematically analyze and synthesize findings across 157 publications addressing online misinformation. The analysis identified four primary thematic domains: the relationship between online misinformation and ideological polarization, connections to institutional distrust, typological classification of misinformation and disinformation, and countermeasures. Thematic analysis was conducted to map interconnections between these domains.

Key Findings

The synthesis revealed a tri-directional relationship among online misinformation, ideological polarization, and institutional distrust. Online misinformation functions simultaneously as both a cause and consequence within this system: exposure to false information strengthens ideological polarization while polarized individuals demonstrate heightened susceptibility to misinformation, and institutional distrust both facilitates misinformation spread and intensifies through exposure to false narratives targeting institutional actors. The review distinguishes between misinformation (unintentional false information) and disinformation (intentional falsehoods), establishing their differential impacts on polarization and trust mechanisms. A conceptual pathway model was developed to represent these tri-directional dynamics.

Implications

The tri-directional framework has significant implications for understanding how misinformation operates within democratic information ecosystems. Rather than treating ideological polarization and institutional distrust as discrete outcomes of misinformation exposure, the identified feedback loops suggest that interventions must account for recursive reinforcement patterns. This structural understanding challenges linear causality models and indicates that addressing misinformation requires simultaneous engagement with polarization and trust dimensions. The proposed strategic framework outlines regulatory directives and countermeasures calibrated to disrupt these feedback mechanisms at multiple intervention points, with relevance for policymakers, platform governance, and institutional actors seeking to mitigate democratic erosion.