Trial reportCognition2023
Memory failure predicts belief regression after the correction of misinformation.
Trial report in Cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sustaining corrected beliefs in false news headlines over time: The roles of correction format and recognizing corrections.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- The truth sandwich format does not enhance the correction of misinformation.Journal of educational psychology · 2025Article
- Misinformation reminders enhance belief updating and memory for corrections: the role of attention during encoding revealed by eye tracking.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Article
- Health conspiracy theories: a scoping review of drivers, impacts, and countermeasures.International journal for equity in health · 2025Article
- The Effect of Correcting Neuromyths on Students' and Teachers' Later Reasoning.Journal of Intelligence · 2024Article
- Don't believe them! Reducing misinformation influence through source discreditation.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- Correcting fake news headlines after repeated exposure: memory and belief accuracy in younger and older adults.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- How do forewarnings and post-warnings affect misinformation reliance? The impact of warnings on the continued influence effect and belief regression.Memory & cognition · 2024Article
- Memory and belief updating following complete and partial reminders of fake news.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2024Article
- The inhibitory impact of collaboration on the continued influence effect of misinformation.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Examining the replicability of backfire effects after standalone corrections.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Article
- Multiple-choice quizzes improve memory for misinformation debunks, but do not reduce belief in misinformation.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2023Article
- Misinformation and the Sins of Memory: False-Belief Formation and Limits on Belief Revision.Journal of applied research in memory and cognition · 2022Article
- Using psychological science to understand and fight health misinformation: An APA consensus statement.The American psychologistReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
After misinformation has been corrected, people initially update their belief extremely well. However, this change is rarely sustained over time, with belief returning towards pre-correction levels. This is called belief regression. The current study aimed to examine the association between memory for the correction and belief regression, and whether corrected misinformation suffers from belief regression more than affirmed facts. Participants from Prolific Academic (N = 612) rated the veracity of 16 misinformation and 16 factual items and were randomly assigned to a correction condition or test-retest control. Immediately after misinformation was corrected and facts affirmed, participants re-rated their belief and were asked whether they could remember the items' presented veracity. Participants repeated this post-test one month later. We found that belief and memory were highly associated, both immediately (⍴ = 0.51), and after one month (⍴ = 0.82), and that memory explained 66% of the variance in belief regression after correcting for measurement reliability. We found the rate of dissenting (accurately remembering that misinformation was presented as false but still believing it) remained stable between the immediate and delayed post-test, while the rate of forgetting quadrupled. After one month, 57% of participants who believed in the misinformation thought that the items were presented to them as true. Belief regression was more pronounced for misinformation than facts, but this was greatly attenuated once pre-test belief was equated. Together, these results clearly indicate that memory plays a fundamental role in belief regression, and that repeated corrections could be an effective method to counteract this phenomenon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.