How to unring the bell: A meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation

2018-05-16T04:13:05Z (GMT) by Nathan Walter Sheila T. Murphy
<p>The study reports on a meta-analysis of attempts to correct misinformation (<i>k</i> = 65). Results indicate that corrective messages have a moderate influence on belief in misinformation (<i>r</i> = .35); however, it is more difficult to correct for misinformation in the context of politics (<i>r</i> = .15) and marketing (<i>r</i> = .18) than health (<i>r</i> = .27). Correction of real-world misinformation is more challenging (<i>r</i> = .14), as opposed to constructed misinformation (<i>r</i> = .48). Rebuttals (<i>r</i> = .38) are more effective than forewarnings (<i>r</i> = .16), and appeals to coherence (<i>r</i> = .55) outperform fact-checking (<i>r</i> = .25), and appeals to credibility (<i>r</i> = .14).</p>