Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37560816›Full record

SynthesisJournal of medical Internet research2023

Psychological Inoculation for Credibility Assessment, Sharing Intention, and Discernment of Misinformation: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Chang Lu, Bo Hu, Qiang Li, Chao Bi, Xing-Da Ju

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of medical Internet research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
42.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Fighting fire with fire: Prebunking with the use of a plausible meta-conspiracy framing.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The Role of Humor in Inoculation Theory.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. [Mis- and disinformation in social media: mitigating risks in digital health communication].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Chang Lu *School of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6331-622X
Bo Hu *School of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.ORCID 0000-0002-5824-9090
Qiang LiSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.ORCID 0009-0005-0025-0274
Chao BiSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.ORCID 0000-0002-6309-3086
Xing-Da JuSchool of Psychology, Northeast Normal University, Changchun City, Jilin Province, China.ORCID 0000-0003-0366-4745
Northeast Normal University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe prevalence of misinformation poses a substantial threat to individuals' daily lives, necessitating the deployment of effective remedial approaches. One promising strategy is psychological inoculation, which pre-emptively immunizes individuals against misinformation attacks. However, uncertainties remain regarding the extent to which psychological inoculation effectively enhances the capacity to differentiate between misinformation and real information.

objectiveTo reduce the potential risk of misinformation about digital health, this study aims to examine the effectiveness of psychological inoculation in countering misinformation with a focus on several factors, including misinformation credibility assessment, real information credibility assessment, credibility discernment, misinformation sharing intention, real information sharing intention, and sharing discernment.

methodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, we conducted a meta-analysis by searching 4 databases (Web of Science, APA PsycINFO, Proquest, and PubMed) for empirical studies based on inoculation theory and outcome measure-related misinformation published in the English language. Moderator analyses were used to examine the differences in intervention strategy, intervention type, theme, measurement time, team, and intervention design.

resultsBased on 42 independent studies with 42,530 subjects, we found that psychological inoculation effectively reduces misinformation credibility assessment (d=-0.36, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.23; P<.001) and improves real information credibility assessment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.06-0.33; P=.005) and real information sharing intention (d=0.09, 95% CI 0.03-0.16; P=.003). However, psychological inoculation does not significantly influence misinformation sharing intention (d=-0.35, 95% CI -0.79 to 0.09; P=.12). Additionally, we find that psychological inoculation effectively enhances credibility discernment (d=0.20, 95% CI 0.13-0.28; P<.001) and sharing discernment (d=0.18, 95% CI 0.12-0.24; P<.001). Regarding health misinformation, psychological inoculation effectively decreases misinformation credibility assessment and misinformation sharing intention. The results of the moderator analyses showed that content-based, passive inoculation was more effective in increasing credibility and sharing intention. The theme of climate change demonstrates a stronger effect on real information credibility. Comparing intervention types showed that pre-post interventions are more effective for misinformation credibility assessment, while post-only interventions are better for credibility discernment.

conclusionsThis study indicated that psychological inoculation enhanced individuals' ability to discern real information from misinformation and share real information. Incorporating psychological inoculation to cultivate an informed public is crucial for societal resilience against misinformation threats in an age of information proliferation. As a scalable and cost-effective intervention strategy, institutions can apply psychological inoculation to mitigate potential misinformation crises.

Indexed as

CommunicationIntentionHumansInformation DisseminationLanguageOutcome Assessment, Health Carediscernmentmeta-analysismisinformationpsychological inoculationsharing

Identifiers

PMID37560816
PMCPMC10498317
OpenAlexW4385717016

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.