Misinformation exposure per se may not trigger cynicism, but perceived prevalence of misinformation and hostile information does

This study critically examines the role of various misinformation perceptions in fostering cynicism, challenging the conventional exposure-effect model that posits direct causality between misinformation exposure and increased cynicism. Instead, we argue that cynicism primarily results from the perceived prevalence of misinformation and perceived exposure to hostile information rather than from perceived encounters with misinformation per se. Using a two-wave panel data collected around the 2020 U.S. presidential election, this study explores how different perceptions related to misinformation (perceived exposure to misinformation, perceived exposure with fact-checked misinformation, perceived prevalence of misinformation, and perceived exposure to hostile information) contribute to the development of cynicism over time.Our findings reveal that perceived prevalence of misinformation and perceived exposure to hostile information are stronger predictors of cynicism than perceived misinformation exposure. This suggests a complex dynamic in which heightened awareness of misinformation may inadvertently exacerbate cynicism, thus posing challenges for interventions that emphasize raising public awareness of misinformation. These results have significant implications for both theoretical understanding of misinformation’s impact on public trust and for the design of more effective interventions. By shifting focus from exposure to perceptions of the information environment, this research highlights the need for strategies that address public perceptions and trust in information systems. This approach not only contributes to academic debates but also offers practical guidance for policymakers and practitioners in media literacy and information governance.