Literature DB >> 35130012

The backfire effect after correcting misinformation is strongly associated with reliability.

Briony Swire-Thompson1, Nicholas Miklaucic1, John P Wihbey2, David Lazer1, Joseph DeGutis3.   

Abstract

The backfire effect is when a correction increases belief in the very misconception it is attempting to correct, and it is often used as a reason not to correct misinformation. The current study aimed to test whether correcting misinformation increases belief more than a no-correction control. Furthermore, we aimed to examine whether item-level differences in backfire rates were associated with test-retest reliability or theoretically meaningful factors. These factors included worldview-related attributes, including perceived importance and strength of precorrection belief, and familiarity-related attributes, including perceived novelty and the illusory truth effect. In 2 nearly identical experiments, we conducted a longitudinal pre/post design with N = 388 and 532 participants. Participants rated 21 misinformation items and were assigned to a correction condition or test-retest control. We found that no items backfired more in the correction condition compared to test-retest control or initial belief ratings. Item backfire rates were strongly negatively correlated with item reliability (ρ = -.61/-.73) and did not correlate with worldview-related attributes. Familiarity-related attributes were significantly correlated with backfire rate, though they did not consistently account for unique variance beyond reliability. While there have been previous papers highlighting the nonreplicable nature of backfire effects, the current findings provide a potential mechanism for this poor replicability. It is crucial for future research into backfire effects to use reliable measures, report the reliability of their measures, and take reliability into account in analyses. Furthermore, fact-checkers and communicators should not avoid giving corrective information due to backfire concerns. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35130012      PMCID: PMC9283209          DOI: 10.1037/xge0001131

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  23 in total

Review 1.  Statistics notes: Analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements.

Authors:  A J Vickers; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001-11-10

2.  Predicting short-term stock fluctuations by using processing fluency.

Authors:  Adam L Alter; Daniel M Oppenheimer
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2006-06-05       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing.

Authors:  Stephan Lewandowsky; Ullrich K H Ecker; Colleen M Seifert; Norbert Schwarz; John Cook
Journal:  Psychol Sci Public Interest       Date:  2012-12

4.  Why the backfire effect does not explain the durability of political misperceptions.

Authors:  Brendan Nyhan
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Measurement error and the replication crisis.

Authors:  Eric Loken; Andrew Gelman
Journal:  Science       Date:  2017-02-10       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  The role of familiarity in correcting inaccurate information.

Authors:  Briony Swire; Ullrich K H Ecker; Stephan Lewandowsky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2017-05-15       Impact factor: 3.051

7.  Countering antivaccination attitudes.

Authors:  Zachary Horne; Derek Powell; John E Hummel; Keith J Holyoak
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-08-03       Impact factor: 11.205

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

Authors:  Ullrich K H Ecker; Brandon K N Sze; Matthew Andreotta
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 6.237

9.  Measuring individual differences in cognitive abilities in the lab and on the web.

Authors:  Simón Ruiz; Xiaobin Chen; Patrick Rebuschat; Detmar Meurers
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-11       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  1 in total

1.  Recalling fake news during real news corrections can impair or enhance memory updating: the role of recollection-based retrieval.

Authors:  Paige L Kemp; Timothy R Alexander; Christopher N Wahlheim
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2022-09-16
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.