The article deals with the problem of perception of false (fake) information by mass audience, especially by students. Fake information today is similar to viruses that instantly "infect" the mass of recipients. A separate category of fake information is fake news, the worst consequence of which is real actions of people based on unreliable information that does not correspond to the facts of objective reality. Students are an active social group and the main consumers of information of social networks where fakes are mainly circulated. Fake news is a product of the post-truth era, characterized by the state of society when the truth becomes those facts and situations that the public believes in. The paper analyses the socio-psychological factors that influence the perception of fake information by student youth. Authors highlights the following socio-psychological factors: social attitudes, cognitive distortions, trust issues and emotional intelligence. The structure of social attitudes is considered and the conclusion is made on the basis of cognitive theories that fake news influencing the affective component of social attitudes changes these attitudes. Cognitive distortions such as the Dunning-Kruger effect, affect heuristics, and confirmation bias play a significant role in this process. The authors conclude that the low level of trust actualizes the problem of trust fake news in Russian society. Authers found that students believe false information more than true information, they are unable to distinguish deception. They use the intuition when try to understand if the information is fake. Emotional intelligence does not directly influence competence in recognizing fake news but influences criticality in assessing one's ability to recognize it. Further study of the issue should consider IQ and EQ indicators for developing scientific and practical recommendations to reduce trust in fake news.

fake news, emotional intelligence, cognitive distortions, social attitude, trust, experiment, focus group, student population

1. Baranova T. S. Psihosemanticheskie metody v sociologii [Psychosemantic methods in sociology]. Sociologija: 4M, 1994: 3–4: 55–64 (in Russ.).
2. Barinov D. N., Nesina V. V. “Fake News” in Social Networks: Media Practices of Students. Voprosy teorii i praktiki zhurnalistiki, 2023: 1(12): 5–23 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17150/2308-6203.2023.12(1):5-23.
3. Bogoslovskaya V. R., Sharkov F. I. The phenomenon of fake news: a review of recent research. Kommunikologija: jelektronnyj nauchnyj zhurnal, 2021: 3(6): 111–118 (in Russ.).
4. Golovatskaya O. E. The Meaning and the Origin of “Fake news” Concept. Kommunikologija, 2019: 2(7): 139–152 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.21453/2311-3065-2019-7-2-139-152.
5. Goleman D. Emotional intelligence. Why it can matter more than IQ. Transl. from Eng. by A. Isayeva, Moscow, Mann, Ivanov i Ferber, 2013: 536 (in Russ.).
6. Goleman D. Primal leadership learning to lead with emotional intelligence. Ed. by D. Goleman, R. Boyatzis, A. McKee. Transl. from Eng. By A. Lisitsyna. Moscow, Al′pina Biznes Buks, 2008: 301 (In Russ.).
7. Kahneman D. Thinking, Fast and Slow. Transl. from Eng. Moscow, AST, 2014: 331 (in Russ.).
8. Zuikina K. L., Sokolova D. V. Fake News: Can Young People Distinguish Fact from Fiction? Vestnik TomGU. Filologiya, 2021: 71: 310–326 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17223/19986645/71/19.
9. Kazun A. Are Fakes Really Dangerous? Fake News and Their Role in the Modern World. Monitoring obshhestvennogo mnenija: jekonomicheskie i social'nye peremeny, 2020: 4: 162–175 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.14515/monitoring.2020.4.791.
10. Lobanova Yu. V. Emotional features of the perception of fake messages. Obrazovatel'nyj vestnik "Soznanie", 2022: 11(24): 59–65. (in Russ.). DOI: 10.26787/nydha-2686- 6846-2022-24-11-59-65.
11. Lusin D. V. Modern ideas about emotional intelligence. In Social intelligence. Theory, measurement, research. Ed. by D. V. Lyusin, D. V. Ushakov. Moscow, IP RAN, 2004: 176 (in Russ.).
12. Montag C. New Gods. How online platforms manipulate our choices and what will bring us back to freedom. Transl. from Germ. Moscow, Individuum. 2023: 353 (in Russ.).
13. Nestik T. A., Deyneka O. S., Maksimenko A. A. Socio-Psychological Predictors of Belief in Conspiracy Theories of the Origin of COVID-19 and Involvement in Social Media. Sotsial'naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo, 2020: 4(11): 87–104 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17759/sps.2020110407.
14. Coro N., Shimanskaya V. Description of the Emotional Intelligence Model EQ and the Intellectual Emotional Profile of the Personality. Accessed 04.10.2023. URL: https://www.marketologi.ru/upload/information_system_79/4/1/8/item_4188/information_items_property_11581.pdf
15. Puzanova Zh. V., Larina T. I. «Healthy Personality» of a Modern University Student as a Research Concept. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2022: 7(31): 151–166 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2022-31-7-151-166.
16. Puzanova Z. V., Larina T. I., Gudkova Y. A. Diagnostics of the students’ level of conformity (results of the methodological experiment). Vestnik RUDN. Ser.: Sociologija, 2022: 3(22): 518–530 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.22363/2313-2272-2022-22-3-518-530.
17. Smirnov V. A. Civilian Attitudes of Russian Students in the Context of a Special Military Operation. Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii, 2023: 8(32): 9–23 (in Russ.) DOI: 10.31992/0869-3617-2023-32-8-9-9-23.
18. Tartakovskaya I. N. Trust in the face of a pandemic: looking for a foothold. Sociologicheskij zhurnal, 2021: 2(27): 68–89 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.19181/socjour.2021.27.2.8087.
19. Tuzovskii I. D. Post Truth as a Digital Age Syndrome:ultimate understanding of the phenomenon and scenarios of the future. Filosofskaja mysl', 2020: 12: 42–60 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.25136/2409-8728.2020.12.34257.
20. Festinger L. Theory of cognitive dissonance. Transl. from Eng. St. Petersburg, Rech', 2000: 320 (in Russ.).
21. Shesterkina L. P., Lobodenko L. K., Krasavina A. V., Marfitsyna A. R. Fact-Checking and Information Verification in the Context of Journalism Education. Voprosy teorii i praktiki zhurnalistiki, 2021: 1(10): 94–108 (in Russ.). DOI: 10.17150/2308-6203.2021.10(1).94-108.
22. Shihirev P. N. Sovremennaja social'naja psihologija SShA [Modern social psychology of the USA]. Мoscow, Nauka, 1979: 344 (in Russ.).
23. Balmas M. When fake news becomes real: Combined exposure to multiple news sources and political attitudes of inefficacy, alienation, and cynicism. Communication Research, 2014: 41(3): 430–454. DOI: 10.1177/0093650212453600.
24. Barchard K. A. Seven components potentially related to emotional intelligence. 2021. Accessed: 04.10.2023. URL: https://ipip.ori.org/newEmotionalIntelligenceKey.htm
25. Caruso D. R., Salovey P. The Emotionally Intelligent Manager: How to Develop and Use the Four Key Emotional Skills of Leadership. San Francisco, Josses–Bass, 2004: 296.
26. Heider F. The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1958: 322.
27. Kruger J., Dunning D. Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1999: 77(6): 1121–1134. DOI: 10.1037//0022-3514.77.6.1121.
28. LaPiere R.T. Attitudes vs Actions. 1934. International Journal of Epidemiology. 2010: 39(1): 7–11. DOI: 10.1093/ije/dyp398.
29. Preston S., Anderson A., Robertson D.J. et al. Correction: Detecting fake news on Facebook: The role of emotional intelligence. PLOS ONE, 2021: 16(10): e0258719. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0258719.
30. Thomas W., Znaniecki F. The Polish peasant in Europe and America. 2nd edition. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1927: 1: 1115.
31. Thorson E. Belief Echoes: The Persistent Effects of Corrected Misinformation. Publicly Accessible PennDissertations. 2013: 170. Acceded 03.04.2023. URL: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/810
32. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 1974: 185(4157): 1124–1131.
33. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Rational choice and the framing of decisions. The Journal of Business, 1986: 59(4): 251–278.
34. Vosoughi S., Roy D., Aral S. The spread of true and false news online. Science, 2018: 359(6380): 1146–1151. DOI: 10.1126/science.aap9559.
35. Wason P. C. On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1960: 3(12): 129–140. DOI: 10.1080/17470216008416717.
36. Yamagishi T. The provision of a sanctioning system as a public good. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1986: 1(51): 110–116. DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.51.1.110.
37. Yamagishi T. Trust as a form of social intelligence. In Cook K. S. (ed.). Trust in society. New York, Russel Sage Foundation Publ., 2021: 121–147.
38. Yamagishi T., Akutsu S., Cho K. et al. Two-component model of general trust: Predicting behavioral trust from attitudinal trust. Social Cognition, 2015: 5(33): 436–458. DOI: 10.1521/soco.2015.33.5.436.
39. Yamagishi T., Kikuchi M., Kosugi M. Trust, gullibility and social intelligence. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1999: 1(2): 145–161. DOI: 10.1111/1467-839X.00030.
40. Yamagishi T., Yamagishi M. Trust and commitment in the United States and Japan. Motivation and Emotion, 1994: 2(8): 129–166. DOI: 10.1007/BF02249397.