Influencers, misinformation and digital harm: how online opinion leaders fuel toxicity

His interest traces back to childhood in a small town in southern Italy, where gossip, part fact, part embellishment, functioned as a kind of social glue.

Watching how stories transformed as they circulated offered an early glimpse into the way communities construct and share their own “truths.”

Years later, as social media reshaped how information moves, Giandomenico noticed similar patterns on a much larger and more volatile scale. Family members, once casually informed by word-of-mouth, became increasingly angry and misled about issues like immigration.

It felt as if the familiar dynamics of gossip had been turned into something capable not only shaping, but distorting opinions. That realisation encouraged him to undertake a PhD focussing on the psychology of misinformation, and it continues to drive his research today.

Giandomenico’s latest study, published in Psychology & Marketing as “Don’t You Know That You’re Toxic? How Influencer Driven Misinformation Fuels Online Toxicity”, offers a clear examination of how influencers weaponise misinformation, which fundamentally reshapes online conversations.

A toxicity–engagement spiral

Giandomenico discovered a behavioural split between influencers and everyday users. Influencers appeared to benefit from posting toxic content: the more inflammatory their posts, the more likes, comments and visibility they received. This created a toxicity–engagement spiral, where hostility is rewarded and encourages further toxic content.

Regular users, by contrast, showed an almost opposite pattern. Their most engaging interactions tended to be civil, and toxic posts were rarely popular amongst this group. This difference highlights the unique incentive structures influencers operate under. For them, emotional intensity equals visibility and visibility equals income and wider influence.

Platforms, often unintentionally, play a role too. Their algorithms promote content that keeps users engaged. This means that emotional, conflict driven posts are more likely to be amplified, and influencers understand this dynamic instinctively. driven posts are more likely to be

Toxic echo chambers

The study reveals how influencers create and sustain toxic echo chambers, environments where misinformation becomes a shared belief and group hostility escalates quickly.

Inside these spaces:

• misinformation is accepted with little scrutiny
• influencers frame misleading claims as part of a shared identity
• followers collectively target brands or individuals accused in the misinformation
• toxic interactions snowball and become more frequent and intense

When ordinary users spread misinformation, responses look vastly different. Comment sections become battlegrounds of toxic debunking, where others aggressively challenge the false claim. Hostility still appears, but it’s fragmented and often directed back at the user rather than at the brand or individual named in the claim.

Why sociopolitical misinformation hits hardest