Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Roozenbeek J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9401631 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media.
Roozenbeek Jon J van der Linden Sander S Goldberg Beth B Rathje Steve S Lewandowsky Stephan S
Science advances 20220824 34
Online misinformation continues to have adverse consequences for society. Inoculation theory has been put forward as a way to reduce susceptibility to misinformation by informing people about how they might be misinformed, but its scalability has been elusive both at a theoretical level and a practical level. We developed five short videos that inoculate people against manipulation techniques commonly used in misinformation: emotionally manipulative language, incoherence, false dichotomies, scap ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Misinformation can have a profound detrimental impact on populations' wellbeing. In this large UK-based online experiment (n = 2430), we assessed the performance of false tag and inoculation interventions in protecting against different forms of misinformation ('variants'). While previous experiments have used perception- or intention-based outcome measures, we presented participants with real-life misinformation posts in a social media platform simulation and measured their engagement, a more ecologically valid approach. Our pre-registered mixed-effects models indicated that both interventions reduced engagement with misinformation, but inoculation was most effective. However, random differences analysis revealed that the protection conferred by inoculation differed across posts. Moderation analysis indicated that immunity provided by inoculation is robust to variation in individuals' cognitive reflection. This study provides novel evidence on the general effectiveness of inoculation interventions over false tags, social media platforms' current approach. Given inoculation's effect heterogeneity, a concert of interventions will likely be required for future safeguarding efforts.
| S-EPMC10082776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe rise of social media users and the explosive growth in misinformation shared across social media platforms have become a serious threat to democratic discourse and public health. The mentioned implications have increased the demand for misinformation detection and intervention. To contribute to this challenge, we are presenting a systematic scoping review of psychological interventions countering misinformation in social media. The review was conducted to (i) identify and map evidence on psychological interventions countering misinformation, (ii) compare the viability of the interventions on social media, and (iii) provide guidelines for the development of effective interventions.MethodsA systematic search in three bibliographic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) and additional searches in Google Scholar and reference lists were conducted.Results3,561 records were identified, 75 of which met the eligibility criteria for the inclusion in the final review. The psychological interventions identified during the review can be classified into three categories distinguished by Kozyreva et al.: Boosting, Technocognition, and Nudging, and then into 15 types within these. Most of the studied interventions were not implemented and tested in a real social media environment but under strictly controlled settings or online crowdsourcing platforms. The presented feasibility assessment of implementation insights expressed qualitatively and with numerical scoring could guide the development of future interventions that can be successfully implemented on social media platforms.DiscussionThe review provides the basis for further research on psychological interventions counteracting misinformation. Future research on interventions should aim to combine effective Technocognition and Nudging in the user experience of online services.Systematic review registration[https://figshare.com/], identifier [https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.14649432.v2].
| S-EPMC9849948 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The continued influence effect of misinformation (CIE) is a phenomenon in which certain information, although retracted and corrected, still has an impact on event reporting, reasoning, inference, and decisions. The main goal of this paper is to investigate to what extent this effect can be reduced using the procedure of inoculation and how it can be moderated by the reliability of corrections' sources. The results show that the reliability of corrections' sources did not affect their processing when participants were not inoculated. However, inoculated participants relied on misinformation less when the correction came from a highly credible source. For this source condition, as a result of inoculation, a significant increase in belief in retraction, as well as a decrease in belief in misinformation was also found. Contrary to previous reports, belief in misinformation rather than belief in retraction predicted reliance on misinformation. These findings are of both great practical importance as certain boundary conditions for inoculation efficiency have been discovered to reduce the impact of the continued influence of misinformation, and theoretical, as they provide insight into the mechanisms behind CIE. The results were interpreted in terms of existing CIE theories as well as within the remembering framework, which describes the conversion from memory traces to behavioral manifestations of memory.
| S-EPMC9049321 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAlthough at present there is broad agreement among researchers, health professionals, and policy makers on the need to control and combat health misinformation, the magnitude of this problem is still unknown. Consequently, it is fundamental to discover both the most prevalent health topics and the social media platforms from which these topics are initially framed and subsequently disseminated.ObjectiveThis systematic review aimed to identify the main health misinformation topics and their prevalence on different social media platforms, focusing on methodological quality and the diverse solutions that are being implemented to address this public health concern.MethodsWe searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published in English before March 2019, with a focus on the study of health misinformation in social media. We defined health misinformation as a health-related claim that is based on anecdotal evidence, false, or misleading owing to the lack of existing scientific knowledge. We included (1) articles that focused on health misinformation in social media, including those in which the authors discussed the consequences or purposes of health misinformation and (2) studies that described empirical findings regarding the measurement of health misinformation on these platforms.ResultsA total of 69 studies were identified as eligible, and they covered a wide range of health topics and social media platforms. The topics were articulated around the following six principal categories: vaccines (32%), drugs or smoking (22%), noncommunicable diseases (19%), pandemics (10%), eating disorders (9%), and medical treatments (7%). Studies were mainly based on the following five methodological approaches: social network analysis (28%), evaluating content (26%), evaluating quality (24%), content/text analysis (16%), and sentiment analysis (6%). Health misinformation was most prevalent in studies related to smoking products and drugs such as opioids and marijuana. Posts with misinformation reached 87% in some studies. Health misinformation about vaccines was also very common (43%), with the human papilloma virus vaccine being the most affected. Health misinformation related to diets or pro-eating disorder arguments were moderate in comparison to the aforementioned topics (36%). Studies focused on diseases (ie, noncommunicable diseases and pandemics) also reported moderate misinformation rates (40%), especially in the case of cancer. Finally, the lowest levels of health misinformation were related to medical treatments (30%).ConclusionsThe prevalence of health misinformation was the highest on Twitter and on issues related to smoking products and drugs. However, misinformation on major public health issues, such as vaccines and diseases, was also high. Our study offers a comprehensive characterization of the dominant health misinformation topics and a comprehensive description of their prevalence on different social media platforms, which can guide future studies and help in the development of evidence-based digital policy action plans.
| S-EPMC7857950 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe development of COVID-19 vaccines has been crucial in fighting the pandemic. However, misinformation about the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccines is spread on social media platforms at a rate that has made the World Health Organization coin the phrase infodemic. False claims about adverse vaccine side effects, such as vaccines being the cause of autism, were already considered a threat to global health before the outbreak of COVID-19.ObjectiveWe aimed to synthesize the existing research on misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines spread on social media platforms and its effects. The secondary aim was to gain insight and gather knowledge about whether misinformation about autism and COVID-19 vaccines is being spread on social media platforms.MethodsWe performed a literature search on September 9, 2021, and searched PubMed, PsycINFO, ERIC, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register. We included publications in peer-reviewed journals that fulfilled the following criteria: original empirical studies, studies that assessed social media and misinformation, and studies about COVID-19 vaccines. Thematic analysis was used to identify the patterns (themes) of misinformation. Narrative qualitative synthesis was undertaken with the guidance of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 Statement and the Synthesis Without Meta-analysis reporting guideline. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal tool. Ratings of the certainty of evidence were based on recommendations from the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group.ResultsThe search yielded 757 records, with 45 articles selected for this review. We identified 3 main themes of misinformation: medical misinformation, vaccine development, and conspiracies. Twitter was the most studied social media platform, followed by Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram. A vast majority of studies were from industrialized Western countries. We identified 19 studies in which the effect of social media misinformation on vaccine hesitancy was measured or discussed. These studies implied that the misinformation spread on social media had a negative effect on vaccine hesitancy and uptake. Only 1 study contained misinformation about autism as a side effect of COVID-19 vaccines.ConclusionsTo prevent these misconceptions from taking hold, health authorities should openly address and discuss these false claims with both cultural and religious awareness in mind. Our review showed that there is a need to examine the effect of social media misinformation on vaccine hesitancy with a more robust experimental design. Furthermore, this review also demonstrated that more studies are needed from the Global South and on social media platforms other than the major platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.Trial registrationPROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42021277524; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021277524.International registered report identifier (irrid)RR2-10.31219/osf.io/tyevj.
| S-EPMC9359307 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This dataset comprises Facebook data on five cases of religious misinformation in Bangladesh. To the best of our knowledge, it is the first publicly accessible dataset on Facebook-based religious misinformation in the country, featuring 7350 comments contributed by unique users. As online religious misinformation has been implicated in causing interreligious violence and tension in Bangladesh, this dataset can offer crucial insights into how social media is being exploited to foment such events. It may also help advance policy reform and activism to protect human rights and prevent the spread of religious misinformation.
| S-EPMC10405184 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Efforts to address misinformation on social media have special urgency with the emergence of coronavirus disease (COVID-19). In one effort, the World Health Organization (WHO) designed and publicized shareable infographics to debunk coronavirus myths. We used an experiment to test the efficacy of these infographics, depending on placement and source. We found that exposure to a corrective graphic on social media reduced misperceptions about the science of 1 false COVID-19 prevention strategy but did not affect misperceptions about prevention of COVID-19. Lowered misperceptions about the science persisted >1 week later. These effects were consistent when the graphic was shared by the World Health Organization or by an anonymous Facebook user and when the graphics were shared preemptively or in response to misinformation. Health organizations can and should create and promote shareable graphics to improve public knowledge.
| S-EPMC7853571 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of misinformation poses a substantial threat to individuals' daily lives, necessitating the deployment of effective remedial approaches. One promising strategy is psychological inoculation, which pre-emptively immunizes individuals against misinformation attacks. However, uncertainties remain regarding the extent to which psychological inoculation effectively enhances the capacity to differentiate between misinformation and real information.ObjectiveTo reduce the potential risk of misinformation about digital health, this study aims to examine the effectiveness of psychological inoculation in countering misinformation with a focus on several factors, including misinformation credibility assessment, real information credibility assessment, credibility discernment, misinformation sharing intention, real information sharing intention, and sharing discernment.MethodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a meta-analysis by searching 4 databases (Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, Proquest, and PubMed) for empirical studies based on inoculation theory and outcome measure-related misinformation published in the English language. Moderator analyses were used to examine the differences in intervention strategy, intervention type, theme, measurement time, team, and intervention design.ResultsBased on 42 independent studies with 42,530 subjects, we found that psychological inoculation effectively reduces misinformation credibility assessment (d=-0.36, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23; P<.001) and improves real information credibility assessment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.33; P=.005) and real information sharing intention (d=0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.16; P=.003). However, psychological inoculation does not significantly influence misinformation sharing intention (d=-0.35, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.09; P=.12). Additionally, we find that psychological inoculation effectively enhances credibility discernment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.13-0.28; P<.001) and sharing discernment (d=0.18, 95% CI 0.12-0.24; P<.001). Regarding health misinformation, psychological inoculation effectively decreases misinformation credibility assessment and misinformation sharing intention. The results of the moderator analyses showed that content-based, passive inoculation was more effective in increasing credibility and sharing intention. The theme of climate change demonstrates a stronger effect on real information credibility. Comparing intervention types showed that pre-post interventions are more effective for misinformation credibility assessment, while post-only interventions are better for credibility discernment.ConclusionsThis study indicated that psychological inoculation enhanced individuals' ability to discern real information from misinformation and share real information. Incorporating psychological inoculation to cultivate an informed public is crucial for societal resilience against misinformation threats in an age of information proliferation. As a scalable and cost-effective intervention strategy, institutions can apply psychological inoculation to mitigate potential misinformation crises.
| S-EPMC10498317 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSocial media is widely used as a source of news and information regarding COVID-19. However, the abundance of misinformation on social media platforms has raised concerns regarding the spreading infodemic. Accordingly, many have questioned the utility and impact of social media news use on users' engagement with (mis)information.ObjectiveThis study offers a conceptual framework for how social media news use influences COVID-19 misinformation engagement. More specifically, we examined how news consumption on social media leads to COVID-19 misinformation sharing by inducing belief in such misinformation. We further explored if the effects of social media news use on COVID-19 misinformation engagement depend on individual differences in cognition and personality traits.MethodsWe used data from an online survey panel administered by a survey agency (Qualtrics) in Singapore. The survey was conducted in March 2022, and 500 respondents answered the survey. All participants were older than 21 years and provided consent before taking part in the study. We used linear regression, mediation, and moderated mediation analyses to explore the proposed relationships between social media news use, cognitive ability, personality traits, and COVID-19 misinformation belief and sharing intentions.ResultsThe results suggested that those who frequently used social media for news consumption were more likely to believe COVID-19 misinformation and share it on social media. Further probing the mechanism suggested that social media news use translated into sharing intent via the perceived accuracy of misinformation. Simply put, social media news users shared COVID-19 misinformation because they believed it to be accurate. We also found that those with high levels of extraversion than those with low levels were more likely to perceive the misinformation to be accurate and share it. Those with high levels of neuroticism and openness than those with low levels were also likely to perceive the misinformation to be accurate. Finally, it was observed that personality traits did not significantly influence misinformation sharing at higher levels of cognitive ability, but low cognitive users largely drove misinformation sharing across personality traits.ConclusionsThe reliance on social media platforms for news consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic has amplified, with dire consequences for misinformation sharing. This study shows that increased social media news consumption is associated with believing and sharing COVID-19 misinformation, with low cognitive users being the most vulnerable. We offer recommendations to newsmakers, social media moderators, and policymakers toward efforts in limiting COVID-19 misinformation propagation and safeguarding citizens.
| S-EPMC9533200 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Measuring the impact of online misinformation is challenging. Traditional measures, such as user views or shares on social media, are incomplete because not everyone who is exposed to misinformation is equally likely to believe it. To address this issue, we developed a method that combines survey data with observational Twitter data to probabilistically estimate the number of users both exposed to and likely to believe a specific news story. As a proof of concept, we applied this method to 139 viral news articles and find that although false news reaches an audience with diverse political views, users who are both exposed and receptive to believing false news tend to have more extreme ideologies. These receptive users are also more likely to encounter misinformation earlier than those who are unlikely to believe it. This mismatch between overall user exposure and receptive user exposure underscores the limitation of relying solely on exposure or interaction data to measure the impact of misinformation, as well as the challenge of implementing effective interventions. To demonstrate how our approach can address this challenge, we then conducted data-driven simulations of common interventions used by social media platforms. We find that these interventions are only modestly effective at reducing exposure among users likely to believe misinformation, and their effectiveness quickly diminishes unless implemented soon after misinformation's initial spread. Our paper provides a more precise estimate of misinformation's impact by focusing on the exposure of users likely to believe it, offering insights for effective mitigation strategies on social media.
| S-EPMC11460357 | biostudies-literature