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?

@article{Walter2019AME,
  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},
  year={2019},
  volume={47},
  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… Expand

Figures and Tables from this paper

Corrections of political misinformation: no evidence for an effect of partisan worldview in a US convenience sample
TLDR
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. Expand
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 anExpand
Can corrections spread misinformation to new audiences? Testing for the elusive familiarity backfire effect
TLDR
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. Expand
How shades of truth and age affect responses to COVID-19 (Mis)information: randomized survey experiment among WhatsApp users in UK and Brazil
TLDR
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. Expand
Can you believe it? An investigation into the impact of retraction source credibility on the continued influence effect
TLDR
It is found that source trustworthiness but not source expertise indeed influences retraction effectiveness, and that substantial continued influence effects can still occur with retractions designed to be and rated as highly credible. Expand
Inoculation theory in the post‐truth era: Extant findings and new frontiers for contested science, misinformation, and conspiracy theories
Although there has been unprecedented attention to inoculation theory in recent years, the potential of this research has yet to be reached Inoculation theory explains how immunity toExpand
Nothing’s gonna change my world – Or do journalistic clarifications help against rumors?
In the current digitalized media landscape, communicators and recipients are struggling to produce and identify reliable information in order to cope with rumors, misconceptions, and fake news. InExpand
The presumed influence of digital misinformation: examining US public's support for governmental restrictions versus corrective action in the COVID-19 pandemic
Purpose: Informed by the third-person effects (TPE) theory, this study aims to analyze restrictive versus corrective actions in response to the perceived TPE of misinformation on social media in theExpand
Do False Allegations Persist? Retracted Misinformation Does Not Continue to Influence Explicit Person Impressions
Corrected misinformation often continues to influence reasoning; this is known as the continued-influence effect (CIE). It is unclear whether this effect also occurs in impression formation, withExpand
Correcting eyewitness suggestibility: does explanatory role predict resistance to correction?
TLDR
The findings suggest that, with a salient correction provided by a credible source, people are capable of updating their knowledge with new information that reverses what they previously thought. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 78 REFERENCES
How to unring the bell: A meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation
ABSTRACT The study reports on a meta-analysis of attempts to correct misinformation (k = 65). Results indicate that corrective messages have a moderate influence on belief in misinformation (r =Expand
Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation
TLDR
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. Expand
He did it! She did it! No, she did not! Multiple causal explanations and the continued influence of misinformation
Two types of misinformation effects are discussed in the literature—the post-event misinformation effect and the continued influence effect. The former refers to the distorting memorial effects ofExpand
Do people keep believing because they want to? Preexisting attitudes and the continued influence of misinformation
TLDR
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. Expand
How to protect eyewitness memory against the misinformation effect: A meta-analysis of post-warning studies
Four decades of research and hundreds of studies speak to the power of post-event misinformation to bias eyewitness accounts of events (see e.g., Loftus’ summary, 2005). A subset of this research hasExpand
Misinformation and Its Correction
TLDR
Recommendations may help practitioners—including journalists, health professionals, educators, and science communicators—design effective misinformation retractions, educational tools, and public-information campaigns. Expand
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 haveExpand
Correcting erroneous inferences in memory: The role of source credibility
Abstract People often continue to rely on erroneous information about people and events, even in the face of subsequent counter information. The current study examined whether this information couldExpand
Repetition, not number of sources, increases both susceptibility to misinformation and confidence in the accuracy of eyewitnesses.
TLDR
People were more misled by-and more confident about-claims that were repeated, regardless of how many eyewitnesses made them, and it is hypothesize that people interpreted the familiarity of repeated claims as markers of accuracy. Expand
Correcting false information in memory: Manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction
TLDR
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. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...