Element contents
Series: Elements in Health Communication
Persistence of Misinformation
Biased Cognitive Processing and Polarization
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 January 2025
Summary
Misinformation can be broadly defined as information that is inaccurate or false according to the best available evidence, or information whose validity cannot be verified. It is created and spread with or without clear intent to cause harm. There is well-documented evidence that misinformation persists despite fact-checking and the presentation of corrective information, often traveling faster and deeper than facts in the online environment. Drawing on the frameworks of social judgment theory, cognitive dissonance theory, and motivated information processing, the authors conceptualize corrective information as a generic type of counter-attitudinal message and misinformation as attitude-congruent messages. They then examine the persistence of misinformation through the lens of biased responses to attitude-inconsistent versus -consistent information. Psychological inoculation is proposed as a strategy to mitigate misinformation.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Series: Elements in Health CommunicationOnline ISBN: 9781009397339Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 06 February 2025
References
Adams, Z., Osman, M., Bechlivanidis, C., & Meder, B. (2023). (Why) is misinformation a problem? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 18(6), 1436–1463. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916221141344.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ahluwalia, R. (2000). Examination of psychological processes underlying resistance to persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 27(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1086/314321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017). Social media and fake news in the 2016 election. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 31(2), 211–236. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, A. B., Bednarczyk, R. A., Ray, C. E. et al. (2017). Association of moral values with vaccine hesitancy. Nature Human Behaviour, 1(12), 873–880. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0256-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anderson, L. R., & McGuire, W. J. (1965). Prior reassurance of group consensus as a factor in producing resistance to persuasion. Sociometry, 28(1), 44–56. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786084.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Atkin, C. K., & Freimuth, V. (2013). Guidelines for formative evaluation research in campaign design. In Rice, R. E. & Atkin, C. K. (Eds.), Public communication campaigns (Vol. 4, pp. 53–68). SAGE.Google Scholar
Balmas, M. (2014). When fake news becomes real: Combined exposure to multiple news sources and political attitudes of inefficacy, alienation, and cynicism. Communication Research, 41(3), 430–454. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650212453600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banas, J. A. (2020). Inoculation theory. In Van den Bulck, J., Ewoldsen, D. R., Mares, M.-L., & Scharrer, E. (Eds.), International encyclopedia of media psychology (pp. 1–8). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119011071.iemp0285.Google Scholar
Banas, J. A., Bessarabova, E., Penkauskas, M. C., & Talbert, N. (2023). Inoculating against anti-vaccination conspiracies. Health Communication, 39(9), 1760–1768. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2023.2235733.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Banas, J. A., & Miller, G. (2013). Inducing resistance to conspiracy theory propaganda: Testing inoculation and metainoculation strategies. Human Communication Research, 39(2), 184–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banas, J. A., & Rains, S. A. (2010). A meta-analysis of research on inoculation theory. Communication Monographs, 77(3), 281–311. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751003758193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banas, J. A., & Richards, A. S. (2017). Apprehension or motivation to defend attitudes? Exploring the underlying threat mechanism in inoculation-induced resistance to persuasion. Communication Monographs, 84(2), 164–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1307999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basol, M., Roozenbeek, J., Berriche, M. et al. (2021). Towards psychological herd immunity: Cross-cultural evidence for two prebunking interventions against COVID-19 misinformation. Big Data & Society, 8(1), 205395172110138. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211013868.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Basol, M., Roozenbeek, J., & Van der Linden, S. (2020). Good news about bad news: Gamified inoculation boosts confidence and cognitive immunity against fake news. Journal of Cognition, 3(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bessarabova, E., Banas, J. A., Reinikainen, H. et al. (2024). Assessing inoculation’s effectiveness in motivating resistance to conspiracy propaganda in Finnish and United States samples. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1416722. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1416722.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boman, C. D. (2023). Protecting against disinformation: Using inoculation to cultivate reactance toward astroturf attacks. Journal of Public Relations Research, 35, 162–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2023.2195184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boman, C. D., & Schneider, E. J. (2021). Finding an antidote: Testing the use of proactive crisis strategies to protect organizations from astroturf attacks. Public Relations Review, 47(1), 102004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2020.102004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brannon, L. A., Tagler, M. J., & Eagly, A. H. (2007). The moderating role of attitude strength in selective exposure to information. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43(4), 611–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.05.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brehm, J. W., & Brehm, S. S. (1981). Psychological reactance: A theory of freedom and control. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Burgoon, M., Cohen, M., Miller, M. D., & Montgomery, C. L. (1978). An empirical test of a model of resistance to persuasion. Human Communication Research, 5(1), 27–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1978.tb00620.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrasco-Farre, C. (2022). The fingerprints of misinformation: How deceptive content differs from reliable sources in terms of cognitive effort and appeal to emotions. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 9(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01174-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In Zanna, M. P., Olson, J. M., & Herman, C. P. (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario symposium (Vol.5, pp. 3–39). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Chaiken, S., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chert, S. (1996). Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information processing. In Gollwitzer, P. M. & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 553–578). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In Uleman, J. S. & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212–252). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Chan, J. C. K., O’Donnell, R., & Manley, K. D. (2022). Warning weakens retrieval-enhanced suggestibility only when it is given shortly after misinformation: The critical importance of timing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 28(4), 694–716. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000394.Google ScholarPubMed
Chan, M. P. S., & Albarracín, D. (2023). A meta-analysis of correction effects in science-relevant misinformation. Nature Human Behaviour, 7(9), 1514–1525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01623-8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chan, M. P. S., Jones, C. R., Hall Jamieson, K., & Albarracín, D. (2017). Debunking: A meta-analysis of the psychological efficacy of messages countering misinformation. Psychological Science, 28(11), 1531–1546. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617714579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In Chaiken, S. & Trope, Y. (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp.73–96). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Chen, L., & Tang, H. (2023). Examining the persuasion process of narrative fear appeals on health misinformation correction. Information, Communication & Society, 26(15), 2923–2941. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2022.2128849.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compton, J. (2013). Inoculation theory. In Dillard, J. P. & Shen, L. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 220–236). Sage.Google Scholar
Compton, J. (2020). Prophylactic versus therapeutic inoculation treatments for resistance to influence. Communication Theory, 30(3), 330–343. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtz004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compton, J. A., & Pfau, M. (2005). Inoculation theory of resistance to influence at maturity: Recent progress in theory development and application and suggestions for future research. Annals of the International Communication Association, 29(1), 97–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2005.11679045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Compton, J., van der Linden, S., Cook, J., & Basol, M. (2021). Inoculation theory in the post‐truth era: Extant findings and new frontiers for contested science, misinformation, and conspiracy theories. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(6), e12602. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Connor Desai, S., & Reimers, S. (2023). Does explaining the origins of misinformation improve the effectiveness of a given correction? Memory & Cognition, 51(2), 422–436. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-022-01354-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cook, J. (2019). Understanding and countering misinformation about climate change. In Chiluwa, I. & Samoilenko, S. (Eds.), Handbook of research on deception, fake news, and misinformation online (pp. 281–306). IGI-Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2017). Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PloS One, 12(5), e0175799. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0175799.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cornwell, J. F. M., & Higgins, E. T. (2018). The tripartite motivational human essence: Value, control, and truth working together. In van Zomeren, M. & Dovidio, J. F. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of the human essence (pp. 71–81). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Denner, N., Viererbl, B., & Koch, T. (2023). Effects of repeated corrections of misinformation on organizational trust: More is not always better. International Journal of Strategic Communication, 17(1), 39–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/1553118x.2022.2135098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillard, J. P., Li, S. S., & Cannava, K. (2022). Talking about sugar-sweetened beverages: Causes, processes, and consequences of campaign-induced interpersonal communication. Health Communication, 37(3), 316–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1838107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dillard, J. P., & Shen, L. (2005). On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication Monographs, 72(2), 144–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750500111815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillard, J. P., Shen, L., & Vail, R. G. (2007). Does perceived message effectiveness cause persuasion or vice versa? 17 consistent answers. Human Communication Research, 33(4), 467–488. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00308.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dillingham, L. L., & Ivanov, B. (2016). Using postinoculation talk to strengthen generated resistance. Communication Research Reports, 33(4), 295–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2016.1224161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Chang, E. P., & Pillai, R. (2014). The effects of subtle misinformation in news headlines. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 20(4), 323–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000028.Google ScholarPubMed
Ecker, U. K., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J. et al. (2022). The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1(1), 13–29. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ecker, U. K., Lewandowsky, S., Jayawardana, K., & Mladenovic, A. (2019). Refutations of equivocal claims: No evidence for an ironic effect of counterargument number. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 8(1), 98–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2018.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., & Tang, D. T. W. (2010). Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation. Memory & Cognition, 38(8), 1087–1100. https://doi.org/10.3758/mc.38.8.1087.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Enders, A., Farhart, C., Miller, J. et al. (2023). Are Republicans and conservatives more likely to believe conspiracy theories? Political Behavior, 45, 2001–2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-022-09812-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fazio, R. H. (2007). Attitudes as object–evaluation associations of varying strength. Social Cognition, 25(5), 603–637. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (2010). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Fombonne, E., Goin-Kochel, R. P., O’Roak, B. J. et al. (2020). Beliefs in vaccine as causes of autism among SPARK cohort caregivers. Vaccine, 38(7), 1794–1803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.12.026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garrett, R. K., & Stroud, N. J. (2014). Partisan paths to exposure diversity: Differences in pro-and counterattitudinal news consumption. Journal of Communication, 64(4), 680–701. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giner-Sorolila, R., & Chaiken, S. (1997). Selective use of heuristic and systematic processing under defense motivation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297231009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guess, A. M., & Lyons, B. A. (2020). Misinformation, disinformation, and online propaganda. In Persily, N. & Tucker, J. A. (Eds.), Social media and democracy: The state of the field, prospects for reform (pp. 10–33). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunther, A. C., McLaughlin, B., Gotlieb, M. R., & Wise, D. (2017). Who says what to whom: Content versus source in the hostile media effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 29(3), 363–383. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edw009.Google Scholar
Hameleers, M. (2022). Separating truth from lies: Comparing the effects of news media literacy interventions and fact-checkers in response to political misinformation in the US and Netherlands. Information, Communication & Society, 25(1), 110–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118x.2020.1764603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (2019). An introduction to cognitive dissonance theory and an overview of current perspectives on the theory. In Harmon-Jones, E. (Ed.), Cognitive dissonance: Reexamining a pivotal theory in psychology (2nd ed., pp. 3–24). American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hart, P. S., & Nisbet, E. C. (2012). Boomerang effects in science communication: How motivated reasoning and identity cues amplify opinion polarization about climate mitigation policies. Communication Research, 39(6), 701–723. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211416646.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heider, F. (1946). Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology, 21(1), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1946.9917275.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Higgins, E. T. (1996). Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. In Higgins, E. T. & Kruglanski, A. W. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 133–168). Guilford.Google Scholar
Ivanov, B. (2017). Inoculation theory applied in health and risk messaging. Oxford research encyclopedia of communication.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Dillingham, L. L., Parker, K. A. et al. (2018). Sustainable attitudes: Protecting tourism with inoculation messages. Annals of Tourism Research, 73, 26–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2018.08.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Parker, K. A., & Dillingham, L. L. (2020). Inoculation theory as a strategic tool. In O’Hair, H. D. & O’Hair, M. J. (Eds.), Handbook of applied communication research (Vol.1, pp. 13–28). Wiley.Google Scholar
Ivanov, B., Parker, K. A., & Pfau, M. (2012). The interaction effect of attitude base and multiple attacks on the effectiveness of inoculation. Communication Research Reports, 29(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/08824096.2011.616789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Pfau, M., & Parker, K. A. (2009). Can inoculation withstand multiple attacks? An examination of the effectiveness of the inoculation strategy compared to the supportive and restoration strategies. Communication Research, 36(5), 655–676. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650209338909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Rains, S. A., Dillingham, L. L. et al. (2022). The role of threat and counterarguing in therapeutic inoculation. Southern Communication Journal, 87(1), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794X.2021.1983012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Rains, S. A., Geegan, S. A. et al. (2017). Beyond simple inoculation: Examining the persuasive value of inoculation for audiences with initially neutral or opposing attitudes. Western Journal of Communication, 81(1), 105–126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2016.1224917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Sellnow, T., Getchell, M., & Burns, W. (2018). The potential for inoculation messages and postinoculation talk to minimize the social impact of politically motivated acts of violence. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management, 26(4), 414–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ivanov, B., Sims, J. D., Compton, J. et al. (2015). The general content of postinoculation talk: Recalled issue-specific conversations following inoculation treatments. Western Journal of Communication, 79(2), 218–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2014.943423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Janmohamed, K., Walter, N., Nyhan, K. et al. (2021). Interventions to mitigate COVID-19 misinformation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Health Communication, 26(12), 846–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/10810730.2021.2021460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jeong, M., & Bae, R. E. (2018). The effect of campaign-generated interpersonal communication on campaign-targeted health outcomes: A meta-analysis. Health Communication, 33(8), 988–1003. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2017.1331184.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jiang, L. C., Sun, M., Chu, T. H., & Chia, S. C. (2022). Inoculation works and health advocacy backfires: Building resistance to COVID-19 vaccine misinformation in a low political trust context. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 976091. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.976091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. T., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Effects of involvement on persuasion: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 106(2), 290–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kemp, P. L., Loaiza, V. M., & Wahlheim, C. N. (2022). Fake news reminders and veracity labels differentially benefit memory and belief accuracy for news headlines. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-25649-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Meng, J. (2011). Reinforcement of the political self through selective exposure to political messages. Journal of Communication, 61(2), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2011.01543.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knobloch-Westerwick, S., Westerwick, A., & Johnson, B. (2015). Selective exposure in the communication technology context. In Sundar, S. S. (Ed.), Handbook of the psychology of communication technology (pp. 407–427). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kouzy, R., Abi Jaoude, J., Kraitem, A. et al. (2020). Coronavirus goes viral: Quantifying the COVID-19 misinformation epidemic on Twitter. Cureus, 12(3), e7255. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.7255.Google ScholarPubMed
Krause, N. M., Freiling, I., Beets, B., & Brossard, D. (2020). Fact-checking as risk communication: The multi-layered risk of misinformation in times of COVID-19. Journal of Risk Research, 23(7–8), 1052–1059. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2020.1756385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krause, N. M., Freiling, I., & Scheufele, D. A. (2022). The “infodemic” infodemic: Toward a more nuanced understanding of truth-claims and the need for (not) combatting misinformation. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 700(1), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027162221086263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuklinski, J. H., Quirk, P. J., Jerit, J., Schwieder, D., & Rich, R. F. (2000). Misinformation and the currency of democratic citizenship. The Journal of Politics, 62(3), 790–816. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-3816.00033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lazer, D. M., Baum, M. A., Benkler, Y. et al. (2018). The science of fake news. Science, 359(6380), 1094–1096. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao2998.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lees, J., Banas, J. A., Linvill, D., Meirick, P. C., & Warren, P. (2023). The Spot the Troll Quiz game increases accuracy in discerning between real and in authentic social media accounts. PNAS Nexus, 2, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgad094.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K., & Cook, J. (2017). Beyond misinformation: Understanding and coping with the “post-truth” era. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 6(4), 353–369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2017.07.008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewandowsky, S., & Van Der Linden, S. (2021). Countering misinformation and fake news through inoculation and prebunking. European Review of Social Psychology, 32(2), 348–384. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2021.1876983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, W. W. K. (2022). Enhancing inoculation in the spiral of silence to promote resistance to attacks: Examining public opinion on Taiwan-PRC relations. Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research, 10(3), 149–177. https://doi.org/10.15206/ajpor.2022.10.3.149.Google Scholar
Lin, W.-K., & Pfau, M. (2007). Can inoculation work against the spiral of silence? A study of public opinion on the future of Taiwan. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19(2), 155–172. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpor/edl030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loomba, S., de Figueiredo, A., Piatek, S. J., de Graaf, K., & Larson, H. J. (2021). Measuring the impact of COVID-19 vaccine misinformation on vaccination intent in the UK and USA. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(5), 337–348. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01056-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, C., Hu, B., Li, Q., Bi, C., & Ju, X.-D. (2023). Psychological inoculation for credibility assessment, sharing intention, and discernment of misinformation: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25(1), e49255. https://doi.org/10.2196/49255.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lumsdaine, A. A., & Janis, I. L. (1953). Resistance to “counterpropaganda” produced by one-sided and two-sided “propaganda” presentations. Public Opinion Quarterly, 17(3), 311–318. https://doi.org/10.1086/266464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maertens, R., Anseel, F., & van der Linden, S. (2020). Combatting climate change misinformation: Evidence for longevity of inoculation and consensus messaging effects. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 70, 101455. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maertens, R., Roozenbeek, J., Basol, M., & van der Linden, S. (2021). Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 27(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000315.supp.Google ScholarPubMed
Martel, C., Mosleh, M., & Rand, D. G. (2021). You’re definitely wrong, maybe: Correction style has minimal effect on corrections of misinformation online. Media and Communication, 9(1), 120–133. https://doi.org/10.17645/mac.v9i1.3519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mason, A. M., Compton, J., Tice, E. et al. (2024). Analyzing the prophylactic and therapeutic role of inoculation to facilitate resistance to conspiracy theory beliefs. Communication Reports, 37(1), 13–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2023.2256803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1961). The effectiveness of supportive and refutational defenses in immunizing and restoring beliefs against persuasion. Sociometry, 24(2), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.2307/2786067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1962). Persistence of the resistance to persuasion induced by various types of prior belief defenses. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 64(4), 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0044167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J. (1964). Inducing resistance to persuasion: Some contemporary approaches. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 1, 191–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/S00652601(08)60052-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGuire, W. J., & Papageorgis, D. (1961). The relative efficacy of various types of prior belief-defense in producing immunity against persuasion. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(2), 327–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042026.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGuire, W. J., & Papageorgis, D. (1962). Effectiveness of forewarning in developing resistance to persuasion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 26(1), 24–34. https://doi.org/10.1086/267068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McQuade, B. (2024). Attack from within: How disinformation is sabotaging America. Seven Stories Press.Google Scholar
Mikolon, S., Quaiser, B., & Wieseke, J. (2015). Don’t try harder: Using customer inoculation to build resistance against service failures. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 512–527. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0398-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, C. H., Ivanov, B., Sims, J. et al. (2013). Boosting the potency of resistance: Combining the motivational forces of inoculation and psychological reactance. Human Communication Research, 39(1), 127–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01438.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Motta, M., Callaghan, T., & Sylvester, S. (2018). Knowing less but presuming more: Dunning-Kruger effects and the endorsement of anti-vaccine policy attitudes. Social Science & Medicine, 211(211), 274–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.06.032.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nabi, R. L. (2003). “Feeling” resistance: Exploring the role of emotionally evocative visuals in inducing inoculation. Media Psychology, 5(2), 199–223. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532785XMEP0502_4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagel, J. (2010). Knowledge ascriptions and the psychological consequences of thinking about error. The Philosophical Quarterly, 60(239), 286–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2009.624.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nan, X., Thier, K., & Wang, Y. (2023). Health misinformation: what it is, why people believe it, how to counter it. Annals of the International Communication Association, 47(4), 381–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2023.2225489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nan, X., Wang, Y., & Thier, K. (2022). Why do people believe health misinformation and who are at risk? A systematic review of individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation. Social Science & Medicine, 314, 115398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, T. P., Nisbet, E. C., & Nisbet, M. C. (2018). Climate change, cultural cognition, and media effects: Worldviews drive news selectivity, biased processing, and polarized attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 27(8), 985–1002. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662518801170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Novilla, M. L. B., Goates, M. C., Redelfs, A. H. et al. (2023). Why parents say no to having their children vaccinated against Measles: A systematic review of the social determinants of parental perceptions on MMR vaccine hesitancy. Vaccines, 11(5), 926. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11050926.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010). When corrections fail: The persistence of political misperceptions. Political Behavior, 32(2), 303–330. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osgood, C. E., & Tannenbaum, P. H. (1955). The principle of congruity in the prediction of attitude change. Psychological Review, 62(1), 42–55. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048153.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pandey, A., & Galvani, A. P. (2023). Exacerbation of measles mortality by vaccine hesitancy worldwide. The Lancet Global Health, 11(4), e478–e479. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00063-3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papageorgis, D., & McGuire, W. J. (1961). The generality of immunity to persuasion produced by pre-exposure to weakened counterarguments. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62(3), 475–481. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, K. A., Ivanov, B., & Compton, J. (2012). Inoculation’s efficacy with young adults’ risky behaviors: Can inoculation confer cross-protection over related but untreated issues? Health Communication, 27(3), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2011.575541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parker, K. A., Ivanov, B., Matig, J., Dillingham, L. L., & Peritore, N. (2022). Inoculation booster messages: Frequency, content, and timing. The Journal of Communication and Media Studies, 7(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18848/2470-9247/CGP/v07i01/1-19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrocelli, J. V., Tormala, Z. L., & Rucker, D. D. (2007). Unpacking attitude certainty: Attitude clarity and attitude correctness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.1.30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1979). Issue involvement can increase or decrease persuasion by enhancing message-relevant cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(10), 1915–1926. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.10.1915.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Berkowitz, (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Pfau, M. (1997). The inoculation model of resistance to influence. In Barnett, G. A. & Boster, F. J. (Eds.), Progress in communication sciences: Advances in persuasion (Vol. 13, pp. 133–171). Ablex.Google Scholar
Pfau, M., & Bockern, S. V. (1994). The persistence of inoculation in conferring resistance to smoking initiation among adolescents: The second year. Human Communication Research, 20(3), 413–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1994.tb00329.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfau, M., Bockern, S. V., & Kang, J. G. (1992). Use of inoculation to promote resistance to smoking initiation among adolescents. Communication Monographs, 59(3), 213–230. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759209376266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfau, M., & Burgoon, M. (1988). Inoculation in political campaign communication. Human Communication Research, 15(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1988.tb00172.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfau, M., Compton, J., Parker, K. A. et al. (2004). The traditional explanation for resistance versus attitude accessibility: Do they trigger distinct or overlapping processes of resistance? Human Communication Research, 30(3), 329–360. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/30.3.329.Google Scholar
Pfau, M., Park, D., Holbert, R. L., & Cho, J. (2001). The effects of party- and PAC-sponsored issue advertising and the potential of inoculation to combat its impact on the democratic process. American Behavioral Scientist, 44(12), 2379–2397. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027640121958384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pfau, M., Tusing, K. J., Koerner, A. F. et al. (1997). Enriching the inoculation construct: The role of critical components in the process of resistance. Human Communication Research, 24(2), 187–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.1997.tb00413.x.Google Scholar
Pluviano, S., Watt, C., & Della Sala, S. (2017). Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies. PloS One, 12(7), e0181640. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181640.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Preston, S. D., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2002). Empathy: Its ultimate and proximate bases. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 25(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x02000018.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Putman, A. L., Sungkhasettee, V. W., & Roediger, H. L. III (2017). When misinformation improves memory: The effects of recollecting change. Psychological Science, 28(1), 36–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616672268.Google Scholar
Reich, J. A. (2016). Calling the shots: Why parents reject vaccines. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Rich, P. R., & Zaragoza, M. S. (2020). Correcting misinformation in news stories: An investigation of correction timing and correction durability. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 9(3), 310–322. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0101850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, A. S., & Banas, J. A. (2015). Inoculating against reactance to persuasive health messages. Health Communication, 30(5), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2013.867005.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richards, A. S., & Banas, J. A. (2018). The opposing mediational effects of apprehensive threat and motivational threat when inoculating against reactance to health promotion. The Southern Communication Journal, 83(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1080/1041794X.2018.1498909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Richards, A. S., Banas, J. A., & Magid, Y. (2017). More on inoculating against reactance to persuasive health messages: The paradox of threat. Health Communication, 32(7), 890–902. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2016.1196410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richards, A. S., Bessarabova, E., Banas, J. A., & Larsen, M. (2021). Freedom-prompting reactance mitigation strategies function differently across levels of trait reactance. Communication Quarterly, 69(3), 238–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2021.1920443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogers, R. W., & Thistlethwaite, D. L. (1969). An analysis of active and passive defenses in inducing resistance to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11(4), 301–308. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027354.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019a). The fake news game: Actively inoculating against the risk of misinformation. Journal of Risk Research, 22(5), 570–580. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2018.1443491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019b). Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2020). Breaking Harmony Square: A game that “inoculates” against political misinformation. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review, 1(8). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-47.Google Scholar
Roozenbeek, J., Van Der Linden, S., Goldberg, B., Rathje, S., & Lewandowsky, S. (2022). Psychological inoculation improves resilience against misinformation on social media. Science Advances, 8(34), eabo6254. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abo6254.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roozenbeek, J., van der Linden, S., & Nygren, T. (2020). Prebunking interventions based on the psychological theory of “inoculation” can reduce susceptibility to misinformation across cultures. Harvard Kennedy School Misinformation Review. https://doi.org/10.37016//mr-2020-008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roozenbeek, J., Maertens, R., McClanahan, W., & van der Linden, S. (2021). Disentangling item and testing effects in inoculation research on online misinformation: Solomon revisited. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 81(2), 340–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164420940378.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sangalang, A., Ophir, Y., & Cappella, J. N. (2019). The potential for narrative correctives to combat misinformation. Journal of Communication, 69(3), 298–319. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqz014.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seifert, C. M. (2002). The continued influence of misinformation in memory: What makes a correction effective? Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 41, 265–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(02)80009-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seifert, C. M. (2014). The continued influence effect: The persistence of misinformation in memory and reasoning following correction. In Rapp, D. N. & Braasch, J. L. G. (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: Theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational science (pp. 39–71). MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharot, T., & Sunstein, C. R. (2020). How people decide what they want to know. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(1), 14–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0793-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shen, L. (2010). On a scale of state empathy during message processing. Western Journal of Communication, 74(5), 504–524. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2010.512278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shen, L., & Zhou, Y. (2021). Epistemic egocentrism and processing of vaccine misinformation (vis-à-vis scientific evidence): The case of vaccine-autism link. Health Communication, 36(11), 1405–1416. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2020.1761074.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. (1961). Social judgment: Assimilation and contrast effects in communication and attitude change. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Sherif, C. W., Kelly, M., Rodgers, H. L. Jr, Sarup, G., & Tittler, B. I. (1973). Personal involvement, social judgment, and action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27(3), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherif, C. W., Sherif, M., & Nebergall, R. E. (1965). Attitude and attitude change: The social judgment-involvement approach. Saunders Philadelphia.Google Scholar
Sherman, D. K., & Cohen, G. L. (2002). Accepting threatening information: Self-affirmation and the reduction of defensive biases. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11(4), 119–123. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Southwell, B. G., Otero Machuca, J., Cherry, S. T., Burnside, M., & Barrett, N. J. (2023). Health misinformation exposure and health disparities: Observations and opportunities. Annual Review of Public Health, 44(1), 113–130. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-071321-031118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Southwell, B. G., & Yzer, M. C. (2007). The roles of interpersonal communication in mass media campaigns. Annals of the International Communication Association, 31(1), 420–462. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2007.11679072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spampatti, T., Hahnel, U. J. J., Trutnevyte, E., & Brosch, T. (2024). Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries. Nature Human Behavior, 8(2), 380–398. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-023-01736-0.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Staender, A., Humprecht, E., Esser, F., Morosoli, S., & van Aelst, P. (2022). Is sensationalist disinformation more effective? Three facilitating factors at the national, individual, and situational level. Digital Journalism, 10(6), 976–996. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2021.1966315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stop Funding Heat (2021). In denial: Facebook’s growing friendship with climate misinformation. https://stopfundingheat.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/in-denial-v2.pdfGoogle Scholar
Szabo, E. A., & Pfau, M. (2001, November). Reactance as a response to antismoking messages. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
Täuber, S., van Zomeren, M., & Kutlaca, M. (2015). Should the moral core of climate issues be emphasized or downplayed in public discourse? Three ways to successfully manage the double-edged sword of moral communication. Climatic Change, 130(3), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1200-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorson, E. (2016). Belief echoes: The persistent effects of corrected misinformation. Political Communication, 33(3), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2015.1102187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treen, K. M. d’I., Williams, H. T. P., & O’Neill, S. J. (2020). Online misinformation about climate change. WIREs Climate Change, 11(5), e665. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Linden, S. (2022). Misinformation: Susceptibility, spread, and interventions to immunize the public. Nature Medicine, 28(3), 460–467. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-022-01713-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., Rosenthal, S., & Maibach, E. (2017). Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change. Global Challenges, 1(2), 1600008. https://doi.org/10.1002/gch2.201600008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., Cook, J., Leiserowitz, A., & Lewandowsky, S. (2017). Inoculating against misinformation. Science, 358(6367), 1141–1142. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar4533.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Meer, T. G. L. A., & Jin, Y. (2019). Seeking formula for misinformation treatment in public health crises: The effects of corrective information type and source. Health Communication, 35(5), 560–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2019.1573295.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Oostendorp, H. (1996). Updating situation models derived from newspaper articles. Medienpsychologie, 8, 21–33.Google Scholar
van Strien, J. L. H., Kammerer, Y., Brand-Gruwel, S., & Boshuizen, H. P. A. (2016). How attitude strength biases information processing and evaluation on the web. Computers in Human Behavior, 60, 245–252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vraga, E. K., & Bode, L. (2020). Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature: Using expertise and evidence for describing misinformation. Political Communication, 37(1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1716500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vraga, E. K., Kim, S. C., & Cook, J. (2019). Testing logic-based and humor-based corrections for science, health, and political misinformation on social media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63(3), 393–414. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2019.1653102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vraga, E. K., Kim, S. C., Cook, J., & Bode, L. (2020). Testing the effectiveness of correction placement and type on Instagram. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(4), 632–652. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220919082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, N., & Murphy, S. T. (2018). How to unring the bell: A meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation. Communication Monographs, 85(3), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2018.1467564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walter, N., & Tukachinsky, R. (2020). 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? Communication Research, 47(2), 155–177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650219854600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, Y., Thier, K., & Nan, X. (2022). Defining health misinformation. In Keselman, A., Smith, C. A., & Wilson, A. (Eds.), Combating online health misinformation: A professional’s guide to helping the public (pp. 3–16). Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Williams, M. N., & Bond, C. M. C. (2020). A preregistered replication of “Inoculating the public against misinformation about climate change.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 70, 101456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wischnewski, M., & Krämer, N. (2020, July). I reason who I am? Identity salience manipulation to reduce motivated reasoning in news consumption. International Conference on Social Media and Society.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, M. L. M. (2007). Rethinking the inoculation analogy: Effects on subjects with differing preexisting attitudes. Human Communication Research, 33(3), 357–378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00303.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wyer, R. S. (1974). Cognitive organization and change: An information processing approach. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Xu, S., Coman, I. A., Yamamoto, M., & Najera, C. J. (2023). Exposure effects or confirmation bias? Examining reciprocal dynamics of misinformation, misperceptions, and attitudes toward COVID-19 vaccines. Health Communication, 38(10), 2210–2220. https://doi.org/10.1080/10410236.2022.2059802.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zerback, T., Töpfl, F., & Knöpfle, M. (2021). The disconcerting potential of online disinformation: Persuasive effects of astroturfing comments and three strategies for inoculation against them. New Media & Society, 23(5), 1080–1098. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820908530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, X., & Fink, E. L. (2021). Proattitudinal versus counterattitudinal messages: Message discrepancy, reactance, and the boomerang effect. Communication Monographs, 88(3), 286–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2020.1813317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhou, Y., & Shen, L. (2022). Confirmation bias and the persistence of misinformation on climate change. Communication Research, 49(4), 500–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211028049.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zia, A., & Todd, A. M. (2010). Evaluating the effects of ideology on public understanding of climate change science: How to improve communication across ideological divides? Public Understanding of Science, 19(6), 743–761. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662509357871.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
- 2
- Cited by