Social media has shaped our world in the last decade. Recently however, the initial enthusiasm transformed into concerns about the dangers of unchecked sharing of false information. This has prompted a large body of research about interventions to improve peoples’ abilities to spot falsehoods as well as to limit sharing of false information. To gain a deeper understanding of the cognitive underpinnings regarding sharing behavior on social media platforms we conducted two experiments (N = 434 & N = 526) assessing participants’ sharing intention. The first experiment assessed COVID-19 knowledge while the second additionally assessed climate change, nuclear power, marijuana, veganism, and speed limit knowledge. We implemented two interventions on our social media platform ChirPing – (i) priming to focus on information accuracy and (ii) manipulating the deliberation time – assessing whether knowledge about the presented information and confidence in this knowledge moderate intervention effects. Intervention results were mixed, hinting towards an increased sharing of false information with less deliberation time. In both studies, knowledge and confidence affected sharing intentions of true and false information differently: more accurate knowledge was only associated with a lower sharing intention of false information (no impact on true information). Higher confidence in knowledge, however, was only associated with a higher sharing intention of true information (no impact on false information). This not only suggests that increasing deliberation time might be an effective intervention against sharing of false information but also stresses the importance of differentiating between sharing of true and false information in further research.