The researchers found some asymmetries, however. Conservatives who scored high in faith intuition (i.e., those who tend to think with their gut instincts) had higher perceptions of the legitimacy among fake news, although this variable had little effect on the judgments of liberals. The researchers suggest that conservatives may be most susceptible on average to fall prey to fake news stories, considering that they are the group most likely to be exposed to such material online, and they are also the group with the highest average levels of faith in intuition.
However, liberals aren't off the hook, as they are statistically more likely to use investment in the righteousness of their political viewpoints to believe politically-consistent news stories, and their higher level of need for cognition to delegitimize politically-inconsistent news stories. The researchers found that liberals who scored higher in a measure of "collective narcissism"-- which measures a tendency to invest in, and perceive superiority of, your political views--showed exaggerated legitimacy judgments for the politically-consistent (e.g., anti-Trump) fake news stories. This data is interesting because it suggests that collective narcissism is not only a right-wing populist phenomenon.
Taken together, all of these findings are consistent with an identity-based approach to the understanding of politically and ideologically motivated engagement with "fake news." It's clear that we must view fake news engagement through a motivated reasoning lens, and that both conservatives and liberals can fall prey to fake news, even though the underlying motives may differ within each group.
These findings further emphasize the importance of really thinking through how the spread of political misinformation at a societal level can impact the political landscape. As the researchers note, "it might not be enough to ask people to think more critically about political views. Instead, we might look to reduce the effects of online echo chambers and facilitate greater levels of communication between those with opposing political outlooks."

These key psychological differences can determine whether you're liberal or conservative

Politically, Americans are highly divided.When it comes to issues of race, immigration, national security, and environmental protection, they disagree about how the government should handle things like never before.

Relative to polls in the 1990s, Republicans are now much more likely to say poor people have it easy, while Democrats are less likely to say so. Conservatives are also more likely to say that environmental regulations are costing the US too many jobs. Liberals now seem less convinced that peace can be achieved through military strength than they were decades ago.

The Pew Research Center reports that the country's political divisions now far exceed "divisions along basic demographic lines, such as age, education, gender and race." The share of Americans who sit in the middle of the political spectrum is lower, too.

Russian bots have taken advantage of these widening differences on Facebook and Twitter in an attempt to drive Americans' opinions further apart.

But what in the brains of conservative and liberal voters actually drive their belief systems? Scientists have been researching the psychological differences between people with different stances, and there are a few key ways that people on opposite ends of the political spectrum see the world. Here's what the data shows:

Being scared can make you more conservative.

Decades of research have shown that people get more conservative when they feel threatened and afraid.

 Threats of terrorism make everyone less liberal — researchers found this was especially true in the months after 9/11. During that time, the US saw a conservative shift, and Americans displayed increased support for military spending and for President George W. Bush. 

  Americans aren't the only ones whose political leanings are influenced by fear. A 2003 review of research conducted in five countries looked at 22 separate tests of the hypothesis that fear fuels conservative viewpoints and found it was universally true.

 A conservative brain is more active in different areas than a liberal one.