Public understanding of human rights and the role of misinformation: a rapid evidence review (summary)

This rapid evidence review considers public understanding of human rights, the impact of misinformation and disinformation, and the effectiveness of approaches designed to increase that understanding. The review draws on more than 100 publications from a range of international sources, including:

• academic research
• evaluations
• grey literature

A consistent finding emerges across the evidence – understanding human rights is more than simply knowing that rights exist. People are more likely to understand and act on their rights when those rights are:

• meaningful in everyday life
• reinforced by institutions they trust
• supported by reliable information

The review also found important limitations in the evidence base. While the literature provides insight into how people understand and experience rights, there is comparatively little robust evidence on long-term outcomes or whether increased understanding leads to lasting behaviour change.

Understanding goes beyond awareness

The evidence suggests that awareness alone does not equate to understanding. People may know about human rights in principle while lacking the confidence, support or opportunity to exercise them in practice. Across the literature reviewed, findings suggest understanding is shaped by lived experience as much as by information or education. However, awareness remains an important foundation for understanding, even if it is rarely sufficient on its own to produce meaningful engagement with rights or behaviour change.

More information does not always translate into action

Lots of interventions, including education, can improve awareness and encourage positive attitudes towards human rights, particularly in the short term. However, the review found a consistent distinction between awareness and deeper understanding. Interventions that rely primarily on communicating information often struggle to translate knowledge into action. Evidence suggests that more promising approaches are those which are participatory, reflective and experiential, helping people see themselves as active rights-holders rather than passive recipients of information.

Trust and institutions matter

An important role is played in shaping how people understand rights by:

• schools
• public services
• healthcare settings
• community organisations
• other institutions

The evidence suggests that people are more likely to engage with rights when institutions consistently reinforce rights-based principles through everyday practices.

Misinformation affects trust as well as understanding

The evidence suggests that misinformation (false or inaccurate information shared without intent to mislead) and disinformation (false information deliberately shared to deceive) undermine understanding in several ways and their impact is not limited to spreading false information. Fear, stigma and misleading narratives can:

• erode confidence in institutions
• make it harder to build shared understanding
• weaken support for universal rights

Human rights narratives often compete with alternative messages that are more simplistic or emotionally engaging.

Language and cultural relevance are important

The way human rights are discussed matters. The review also highlights the importance of cultural context and locally meaningful language. The evidence reviewed suggests that human rights are often better understood when linked to more familiar concepts such as:

• dignity
• fairness
• respect

Cultural context also matters, and enabling people to engage with human rights in their first language may help reduce barriers to understanding and support deeper engagement with rights concepts. Additionally, approaches that rely too heavily on legal or technical language may create barriers to engagement.

People's lived conditions shape understanding of rights

One of the strongest findings across the review is the importance of social and economic conditions. Exercising rights can feel risky, irrelevant or impossible to realise due to:

• poverty
• insecure housing
• poor health
• discrimination
• unequal access to services

Across the evidence, people's lived conditions repeatedly emerge as an important factor in shaping whether they are able to act on their rights. The evidence suggests that people's lived conditions are often the real test of whether rights are meaningful in practice, and this highlights that public understanding cannot be separated from wider social and economic conditions.

Implications for policy and practice

The findings suggest that improving public understanding of human rights requires more than raising public awareness. Approaches are most likely to be effective when they combine education and communication with trusted institutions, meaningful participation, and conditions that enable people to exercise their rights in practice.

The evidence also suggests that communications may be more effective when they connect rights to everyday experiences and familiar values, rather than using legal or technical language.

Trust emerges as a particularly important consideration. Strengthening public understanding may therefore depend not only on improving access to information, but also on creating trusted institutions and reliable information environments and supporting community relationships.

These findings are consistent with the Welsh Government’s commitment to bilingual public services. This suggests that providing opportunities to engage with human rights in Welsh and English may reduce linguistic barriers and support more meaningful understanding and participation.

Finally, the review identifies important evidence gaps. There is limited robust evidence on long-term impact, behaviour change and intervention effectiveness, as well as relatively little evidence from Wales or the wider UK. Much of the available evidence comes from international contexts. Strengthening this evidence base would improve understanding of what works to support sustained public understanding of human rights.

Researcher: Equality Evidence Unit

Views expressed in this report are those of the researchers and not necessarily those of the Welsh Government.

For further information please contact:

Equality Evidence Unit
Welsh Government
Cathays Park
Cardiff
CF10 3NQ

Email: equalityevidenceunit@gov.wales 

Social research number: 86/2026