Turning lies into truths: Referential validation of falsehoods

Prior research indicates that repeated exposure enhances the rated truth of both true and false trivia statements, but no prior study has included feedback on the items' actual truth value. In two experiments, repeated true items were rated as more credible than new true items at all interrating intervals (1 week, 1 month, 3 months), whereas repeated false items showed different trends. When feedback was delayed (Experiment 1), repeated false items were rated as less credible than new false statements at 1 week but as more credible at 1 month. With immediate feedback (Experiment 2), repeated false items were rated as less credible than new false items at 1 week but were rated similarly to new false items at 1 and 3 months. The impact of feedback diminishes over time, and participants' initial impression of an item's truth or falsity exerts a lasting bias. Both actual and perceived repetition influence rated truth for true items, whereas only perceived repetition affects false items.