• TESS observes huge outburst from comet 46P/Wirtanen
• Comet 67P surprises scientists with 'bright outbursts', collapsing cliffs and rolling boulders during Rosetta mission
• Debris from increased asteroids and comets? Dust ring discovered 'where it should not be' - in Mercury's orbit
• NASA's surprise discovery changes what we know about asteroids
• Expecting an asteroid? Proposed budget for NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office suddenly increased three-fold

• The Medieval warm period and how grapes grew where polar bears now roam
• Dishing the dirt on Denisova cave: A refuge for hominins and a home to bears, wolves and hyenas
• Mammoth site is over 100,000 years older than previously thought - And the climate was warmer than it is today

• 'Junk' DNA proves functional
• 'Satellite' junk DNA may actually be essential for human survival
• 'Junk DNA' Defines Differences Between Humans and Primates
• Waste not: Research finds that "far from junk DNA," ERVs perform "critical cellular functions"
• BioEssays editor: "'Junk' DNA... full of information!" Including genome-sized "genomic code"

The researchers found that people usually got the numerical relationship right on the issues for which the stats were consistent with how many people viewed the world. For example, participants typically wrote down a larger number for the percentage of people who supported same-sex marriage than for those who opposed it - which is the true relationship.

But when it came to the issues where the numbers went against many people's beliefs - such as whether the number of Mexican immigrants had gone up or down - participants were much more likely to remember the numbers in a way that agreed with their probable biases rather than the truth.

"We had instances where participants got the numbers exactly correct - 11.7 and 12.8 - but they would flip them around," Coronel said.

"They weren't guessing - they got the numbers right. But their biases were leading them to misremember the direction they were going."

By using eye-tracking technology on participants while they read the descriptions of the issues, the researchers had additional evidence that people really were paying attention when they viewed the statistics.

"We could tell when participants got to numbers that didn't fit their expectations. Their eyes went back and forth between the numbers, as if they were asking 'what's going on.' They generally didn't do that when the numbers confirmed their expectations," Coronel said.

"You would think that if they were paying more attention to the numbers that went against their expectations, they would have a better memory for them. But that's not what we found."

In the second study, the researchers investigated how these memory distortions could spread and grow more distorted in everyday life. They designed a study similar to the childhood game of "telephone."

For example, the first person in the "telephone chain" in this study saw the accurate statistics about the trend in Mexican immigrants living in the United States (that it went down from 12.8 million to 11.7 million). They had to write those numbers down from memory, which were then passed along to the second person in the chain, who had to remember them and write them down. The second person's estimates were then sent to a third participant.

Results showed that, on average, the first person flipped the numbers, saying that the number of Mexican immigrants increased by 900,000 from 2007 to 2014 instead of the truth, which was that it decreased by about 1.1 million.

By the end of the chain, the average participant had said the number of Mexican immigrants had increased in those 7 years by about 4.6 million.

"These memory errors tended to get bigger and bigger as they were transmitted between people," Sweitzer said.

Coronel said the study did have limitations. For example, it is possible that the participants would have been less likely to misremember if they were given explanations as to why the numbers didn't fit expectations. And the researchers didn't measure each person's biases going in - they used the biases that had been identified by pre-tests they conducted.

Finally, the telephone game study did not capture important features of real-life conversations that may have limited the spread of misinformation.

But the results did suggest that we shouldn't worry only about the misinformation that we run into in the outside world, Poulsen said.

"We need to realize that internal sources of misinformation can possibly be as significant as or more significant than external sources," she said.

"We live with our biases all day, but we only come into contact with false information occasionally."

• From micro to macro: The intelligent design of the cosmos
• It's another great Nobel Prize year for intelligent design
• Why Darwinism Is Wrong, Dead Wrong - Part 1: Intelligent Design and Information
• A simple proof of intelligent design

• The Truth Perspective: Are Cells the Intelligent Designers? Why Creationists and Darwinists Are Both Wrong
• The Truth Perspective: Mind the Gaps: Locating the Intelligence in Evolution and Design

• Two "lost cities" discovered in Honduras by archaeologists
• 'Extinct' creatures found alive deep within Honduras rainforest