A meta-analysis of correction effects in science-relevant … – Nature.com

Ahmed, W., Downing, J., Tuters, M. & Knight, P. Four experts investigate how the 5G coronavirus conspiracy theory began. The Conversation https://theconversation.com/four-experts-investigate-how-the-5g-coronavirus-conspiracy-theory-began-139137 (2020).

Heilweil, R. The conspiracy theory about 5G causing coronavirus, explained. Vox (2020); https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/4/24/21231085/coronavirus-5g-conspiracy-theory-covid-facebook-youtube

Pigliucci, M. & Boudry, M. The dangers of pseudoscience. The New York Times (2013); https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/10/the-dangers-of-pseudoscience/

Gordin, M. D. The problem with pseudoscience: pseudoscience is not the antithesis of professional science but thrives in sciences shadow. EMBO Rep. 18, 1482 (2017).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Townson, S. Why people fall for pseudoscience (and how academics can fight back). The Guardian (2016); https://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2016/jan/26/why-people-fall-for-pseudoscience-and-how-academics-can-fight-back

Caulfield, T. Pseudoscience and COVID-19weve had enough already. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-01266-z (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. Lazy, not biased: susceptibility to partisan fake news is better explained by lack of reasoning than by motivated reasoning. Cognition 188, 3950 (2019).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Vraga, E. K. & Bode, L. Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature: using expertise and evidence for describing misinformation. Polit. Commun. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1716500 (2020).

Lewandowsky, S. et al. The Debunking Handbook 2020. Databrary https://doi.org/10.17910/b7.1182 (2020).

Pennycook, G. et al. Shifting attention to accuracy can reduce misinformation online. Nature 592, 590595 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Garrett, R. K., Weeks, B. E. & Neo, R. L. Driving a wedge between evidence and beliefs: how online ideological news exposure promotes political misperceptions. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 21, 331348 (2016).

Article Google Scholar

Lazer, D. M. J. et al. The science of fake news: addressing fake news requires a multidisciplinary effort. Science 359, 10941096 (2018).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Wyer, R. S. & Unverzagt, W. H. Effects of instructions to disregard information on its subsequent recall and use in making judgments. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 48, 533549 (1985).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Greitemeyer, T. Article retracted, but the message lives on. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 21, 557561 (2014).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

McDiarmid, A. D. et al. Psychologists update their beliefs about effect sizes after replication studies. Nat. Hum. Behav.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01220-7 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Yousuf, H. et al. A media intervention applying debunking versus non-debunking content to combat vaccine misinformation in elderly in the Netherlands: a digital randomised trial. EClinicalMedicine 35, 100881 (2021).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Kuru, O. et al. The effects of scientific messages and narratives about vaccination. PLoS ONE 16, e0248328 (2021).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Anderson, C. A. Inoculation and counterexplanation: debiasing techniques in the perseverance of social theories. Soc. Cogn. 1, 126139 (1982).

Article Google Scholar

Jacobson, N. G. What Does Climate Change Look Like to You? The Role of Internal and External Representations in Facilitating Conceptual Change about the Weather and Climate Distinction (Univ. Southern California, 2022).

Pluviano, S., Watt, C. & Sala, S. D. Misinformation lingers in memory: failure of three pro-vaccination strategies. PLoS ONE 12, 15 (2017).

Article Google Scholar

Maertens, R., Anseel, F. & van der Linden, S. Combatting climate change misinformation: evidence for longevity of inoculation and consensus messaging effects. J. Environ. Psychol. 70, 101455 (2020).

Article Google Scholar

Chan, M. S., Jones, C. R., Jamieson, K. H. & Albarracin, D. Debunking: a meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation. Psychol. Sci. 28, 15311546 (2017).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Janmohamed, K. et al. Interventions to mitigate vaping misinformation: a meta-analysis. J. Health Commun. 27, 8492 (2022).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Walter, N. & Tukachinsky, R. A meta-analytic examination of the continued influence of misinformation in the face of correction: how powerful is it, why does it happen, and how to stop it? Commun. Res. 47, 155177 (2020).

Article Google Scholar

Walter, N., Cohen, J., Holbert, R. L. & Morag, Y. Fact-checking: a meta-analysis of what works and for whom. Polit. Commun. 37, 350375 (2020).

Article Google Scholar

Walter, N. & Murphy, S. T. How to unring the bell: a meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation. Commun. Monogr. 85, 423441 (2018).

Article Google Scholar

Walter, N., Brooks, J. J., Saucier, C. J. & Suresh, S. Evaluating the impact of attempts to correct health misinformation on social media: a meta-analysis. Health Commun. 36, 17761784 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Chan, M. S., Jamieson, K. H. & Albarracn, D. Prospective associations of regional social media messages with attitudes and actual vaccination: A big data and survey study of the influenza vaccine in the United States. Vaccine 38, 62366247 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Lawson, V. Z. & Strange, D. News as (hazardous) entertainment: exaggerated reporting leads to more memory distortion for news stories. Psychol. Pop. Media Cult. 4, 188198 (2015).

Article Google Scholar

Nature Microbiology. Exaggerated headline shock. Nat. Microbiol. 4, 377377 (2019).

Article Google Scholar

Pinker, S. The media exaggerates negative news. This distortion has consequences. The Guardian (2018); https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/17/steven-pinker-media-negative-news

CDC. HPV vaccine safety. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services https://www.cdc.gov/hpv/parents/vaccinesafety.html (2021).

Jaber, N. Parent concerns about HPV vaccine safety increasing. National Cancer Institute https://www.cancer.gov/news-events/cancer-currents-blog/2021/hpv-vaccine-parents-safety-concerns (2021).

Brody, J. E. Why more kids arent getting the HPV vaccine. The New York Times https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/13/well/live/hpv-vaccine-children.html (2021).

Walker, K. K., Owens, H. & Zimet, G. We fear the unknown: emergence, route and transfer of hesitancy and misinformation among HPV vaccine accepting mothers. Prev. Med. Rep. 20, 101240 (2020).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Normile, D. Japan reboots HPV vaccination drive after 9-year gap. Science 376, 14 (2022).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Larson, H. J. Japans HPV vaccine crisis: act now to avert cervical cancer cases and deaths. Lancet Public Health 5, e184e185 (2020).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Soroka, S., Fournier, P. & Nir, L. Cross-national evidence of a negativity bias in psychophysiological reactions to news. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 1888818892 (2019).

Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Finkenauer, C. & Vohs, K. D. Bad is stronger than good. Rev. Gen. Psychol. 5, 323370 (2001).

Article Google Scholar

Kunda, Z. The case for motivated reasoning. Psychol. Bull. 108, 480498 (1990).

Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar

Kopko, K. C., Bryner, S. M. K., Budziak, J., Devine, C. J. & Nawara, S. P. In the eye of the beholder? Motivated reasoning in disputed elections. Polit. Behav. 33, 271290 (2011).

Article Google Scholar

Leeper, T. J. & Mullinix, K. J. Motivated reasoning. Oxford Bibliographies https://doi.org/10.1093/OBO/9780199756223-0237 (2018).

Johnson, H. M. & Seifert, C. M. Sources of the continued influence effect: when misinformation in memory affects later inferences. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. 20, 14201436 (1994).

Article Google Scholar

Wilkes, A. L. & Leatherbarrow, M. Editing episodic memory following the identification of error. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. Sect. A 40, 361387 (1988).

Article Google Scholar

Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S. & Apai, J. Terrorists brought down the plane!No, actually it was a technical fault: processing corrections of emotive information. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 64, 283310 (2011).

Article Google Scholar

Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N. & Cook, J. Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychol. Sci. Public Interest 13, 106131 (2012).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Nyhan, B. & Reifler, J. Does correcting myths about the flu vaccine work? An experimental evaluation of the effects of corrective information. Vaccine 33, 459464 (2015).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Nyhan, B., Reifler, J., Richey, S. & Freed, G. L. Effective messages in vaccine promotion: a randomized trial. Pediatrics 133, e835e842 (2014).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Nyhan, B. & Reifler, J. When corrections fail: the persistence of political misperceptions. Polit. Behav. 32, 303330 (2010).

Article Google Scholar

Rathje, S., Roozenbeek, J., Traberg, C. S., van Bavel, J. J. & van der Linden, S. Meta-analysis reveals that accuracy nudges have little to no effect for U.S. conservatives: regarding Pennycook et al. (2020). Psychol. Sci. https://doi.org/10.25384/SAGE.12594110.v2 (2021).

Greene, C. M., Nash, R. A. & Murphy, G. Misremembering Brexit: partisan bias and individual predictors of false memories for fake news stories among Brexit voters. Memory 29, 587604 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Gawronski, B. Partisan bias in the identification of fake news. Trends Cogn. Sci. 25, 723724 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Pennycook, G. & Rand, D. G. Lack of partisan bias in the identification of fake (versus real) news. Trends Cogn. Sci. 25, 725726 (2021).

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Borukhson, D., Lorenz-Spreen, P. & Ragni, M. When does an individual accept misinformation? An extended investigation through cognitive modeling. Comput. Brain Behav. 5, 244260 (2022).

Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Roozenbeek, J. et al. Susceptibility to misinformation is consistent across question framings and response modes and better explained by myside bias and partisanship than analytical thinking susceptibility to misinformation. Judgm. Decis. Mak. 17, 547573 (2022).

Article Google Scholar

Bolsen, T., Druckman, J. N. & Cook, F. L. The influence of partisan motivated reasoning on public opinion. Polit. Behav. 36, 235262 (2014).

Article Google Scholar

Hameleers, M. & van der Meer, T. G. L. A. Misinformation and polarization in a high-choice media environment: how effective are political fact-checkers? Commun. Res. 47, 227250 (2020).

See the rest here:
A meta-analysis of correction effects in science-relevant ... - Nature.com