Benefits and risks of applying analytical thinking in fact-checking

Fact-checking is not just finding typos in text or checking the date. It is a complex cognitive process based on analytical thinking — the ability to analyze information into parts, look for cause-and-effect relationships and make reasonable conclusions. This skill is the foundation for professional fact-checking and critical perception of information for an ordinary person. Let’s consider its capabilities and limitations.

The modern world is characterized by an abundance of information coming from all sorts of sources. At the same time, a significant number of people perceive news and other information from the Internet, social networks. Thus, according to the global survey of digital technologies, there are more than 5 billion active users of social networks in the world. This is one of the reasons for the low quality of the information environment: information on the Internet can spread extremely quickly, without proper verification, and at the same time not provide comprehensive information about the fact or phenomenon in question. In addition, the Internet is often full of manipulation, deliberately spread disinformation, fraud, and established misconceptions, including conspiracy theories. Together, these factors increase the risk of being deceived, which can have critical consequences in real life.

In these circumstances, analytical thinking is vital to identifying and protecting against false information. As the basis for a detailed examination of facts rather than blind acceptance, analytical thinking is also closely related to critical thinking, which has a greater emphasis on the evaluative perception of information and skeptical filtering of data, which are necessary for a full analysis.

Research confirms that people with more developed analytical thinking are less susceptible to the influence of false information. The same is true for professional fact-checkers: on the one hand, they need analytical thinking to evaluate and identify false information by breaking down complex facts and statements, searching for evidence and building cause-and-effect relationships, and on the other hand, to build refutations based on the principles of constructing logically sound counterarguments.

Benefits of analytical thinking

• Analytical thinking, which focuses largely on details, is especially effective in cases where it is necessary to process a multi-stage argument, sometimes associated with incorrect interpretation, which is very typical of disinformation and manipulative techniques that use a deliberate accumulation of facts to disguise false information as truthful information.
  
• An analytical approach is important when working with digital materials that require technical expertise. For example, to determine the authenticity of images or videos (deepfakes) that have been altered or generated using neural networks, including by identifying violations of cause-and-effect relationships and image artifacts.

 А striking example of this approach is the GFCN investigation into US President Donald Trump’s trip to Saudi Arabia. In May 2025, social media was filled with allegations that Al Arabiya Farsi had fabricated a fake video showing the American leader trying traditional Arabic coffee. According to critics, the channel was trying to disguise the fact that Trump had actually refused the drink offered to him. However, the GFCN investigation found that the rumors about the fake footage were false, and the recording of the refusal was made in a completely different situation. Thus, the details presented in the two videos differed significantly, which suggested that the action was taking place in a different location. An analysis conducted by comparing videos from different locations with a slow frame rate showed that Trump’s movements in the supposedly generated video completely correspond to the real recordings — but from a different meeting.

• Analytical thinking is indispensable in the case of recording trends necessary for constructing a logical picture of the probability of this or that information. On the one hand, this is facilitated by the ability to see patterns. On the other hand, it is necessary to record anomalies and violations of cause-and-effect relationships when using quantitative methods of analysis and studying statistical information.
  
  Limitations of analytical thinking
  Despite the effectiveness of analytical thinking in solving a number of fact-checking problems, it has its limitations.
  
• When information is decomposed, relationships between elements can be lost. According to Gary Batlett’s concept, these relationships often contain information that is necessary for refutation, which the fact-checker may not see due to excessive focus when decomposing it into its individual components. This is especially important for complex contexts — for example, political, cultural or historical — which are almost impossible to break down into simple components.
  
• The ambiguity of the influence of analytical thinking on the perception of unreliable information. According to the theory of motivated cognition, people do not strive to achieve the truth using analytical thinking, instead they “reason like lawyers, not scientists,” using this skill to defend their beliefs, but not to search for the truth. The influence of this factor is largely reflected in the existence of conspiracy theories, within which even random coincidences can be interpreted as links in the same chain.
  
  However, some studies show that in large samples, analytical thinking does statistically significantly increase the ability to recognize unreliable information, reducing the role of personal biases.
  
  Analytical thinking is not an innate talent, but a skill that can and should be developed. In the conditions of a permanent information flow, it becomes the basis of digital hygiene. For an ordinary user, this means not sharing a questionable post without checking it; for a professional, it means strictly following the methodology, not forgetting about synthesis after careful analysis. Realizing its strength and limitations, we can purposefully develop this ability in ourselves, turning it into a reliable shield against disinformation.