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?

  title={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?},
  author={Nathan Walter and Riva H. Tukachinsky},
  journal={Communication Research},
  pages={155 - 177}
A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the extent of continued influence of misinformation in the face of correction and the theoretical explanations of this phenomenon. Aggregation of results from 32 studies (N = 6,527) revealed that, on average, correction does not entirely eliminate the effect of misinformation (r = –.05, p = .045). Corrective messages were found to be more successful when they are coherent, consistent with the audience’s worldview, and delivered by the source of the… 

Figures and Tables from this paper

Does explaining the origins of misinformation improve the effectiveness of a given correction?

Misinformation often has a continuing influence on event-related reasoning even when it is clearly and credibly corrected; this is referred to as the continued influence effect. The present work

Corrections of political misinformation: no evidence for an effect of partisan worldview in a US convenience sample

Examining a sample of 429 pre-screened US participants supporting either the Democratic or Republican Party found no impact of political worldview on retraction effectiveness, let alone evidence of a backfire effect, and thus the present study did not replicate the asymmetry observed in the Australian-based study.

Exploring factors that mitigate the continued influence of misinformation

The combination of alternative inclusion and direct targeting of misinformation in the correction statement resulted in successful elimination of the CIE, such that individuals who encountered that type of correction behaved similarly to baseline participants who never encountered the (mis)information.

Mapping the field of misinformation correction and its effects: A review of four decades of research

Why people still rely on misinformation after clear corrections is a major concern driving relevant research. Different fields, from psychology to marketing, have been seeking answers. Yet there

Testing the Effectiveness of Correction Placement and Type on Instagram

Despite concerns about misinformation across social media platforms, little attention has been paid to how to correct misinformation on visual platforms like Instagram. This study uses an

The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction

| Misinformation has been identified as a major contributor to various contentious contemporary events ranging from elections and referenda to the response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Not only can

Can corrections spread misinformation to new audiences? Testing for the elusive familiarity backfire effect

There was substantial evidence against familiarity backfire within the context of correcting novel misinformation claims and after a 1-week study-test delay, suggesting that it is safe to repeat misinformation when correcting it, even when the audience might be unfamiliar with the misinformation.

How shades of truth and age affect responses to COVID-19 (Mis)information: randomized survey experiment among WhatsApp users in UK and Brazil

Findings call for evidence-based infodemic interventions by health agencies, with greater engagement of younger adults in pandemic misinformation management efforts, and possible backfire effects of corrective information among older adults (55+) in the UK and Brazil.

Facing Falsehoods: Strategies for Polite Misinformation Correction

Misinformation is a serious problem. One gap in misinformation correction research is understanding the role of relational concerns, particularly adherence to politeness norms within relationships.

Vaccination against misinformation: The inoculation technique reduces the continued influence effect

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,



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

Results indicate that corrective messages have a moderate influence on belief in misinformation, however, it is more difficult to correct for misinformation in the context of politics and marketing than health.

Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation

Persistence was stronger and the debunking effect was weaker when audiences generated reasons in support of the initial misinformation, and a detailed debunking message also correlated positively with the misinformation-persistence effect.

Do people keep believing because they want to? Preexisting attitudes and the continued influence of misinformation

The results showed that preexisting attitudes influence people’s use of attitude-related information but not the way in which a retraction of that information is processed.

Misinformation and Its Correction

Recommendations may help practitioners—including journalists, health professionals, educators, and science communicators—design effective misinformation retractions, educational tools, and public-information campaigns.

Sources of the continued influence effect: When misinformation in memory affects later inferences.

Several lines of research have found that information previously encoded into memory can influence inferences and judgments, even when more recent information discredits it. Previous theories have

Correcting false information in memory: Manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction

It is concluded that the continued influence effect seems to defy most attempts to eliminate it, and a simple computational model based on random sampling that captures this effect pattern is presented.