Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37880245›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

How to "inoculate" against multimodal misinformation: A conceptual replication of Roozenbeek and van der Linden (2020).

Julian Neylan, Mikey Biddlestone, Jon Roozenbeek, Sander van der Linden

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.1field-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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Fighting fire with fire: Prebunking with the use of a plausible meta-conspiracy framing.British journal of psychology (London, England : 1953) · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Julian NeylanTILT, The Hague, The Netherlands. julian.neylan@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0401-4891
Mikey BiddlestoneDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. M.biddlestone@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1438-7392
Jon RoozenbeekDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8150-9305
Sander van der LindenDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK. sv395@cam.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0269-1744
University of Cambridge · GBMinistry of Defence · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Building misinformation resilience at scale continues to pose a challenge. Gamified "inoculation" interventions have shown promise in improving people's ability to recognize manipulation techniques commonly used in misinformation, but so far few interventions exist that tackle multimodal misinformation (e.g., videos, images). We developed a game called Cat Park, in which players learn about five manipulation techniques (trolling, emotional manipulation, amplification, polarization, and conspiracism), and how misinformation can spread through images. To test the game's efficacy, we conducted a conceptual replication (N = 380) of Roozenbeek and van der Linden's 2020 study about Harmony Square, with the same study design, item set, and hypotheses. Like the original study, we find that people who play Cat Park find misinformation significantly less reliable post-gameplay (d = 0.95, p < 0.001) compared to a control group, and are significantly less willing to share misinformation with people in their network (d = 0.54, p < 0.001). These effects are robust across different covariates. However, unlike the original study, Cat Park players do not become significantly more confident in their ability to identify misinformation (p = 0.204, d = - 0.13). We did not find that the game increases people's self-reported motivation and confidence to counter misinformation online.

Indexed as

EmotionsLearningCommunicationHumansMotivationRefraction, OcularTilia

Identifiers

PMID37880245
PMCPMC10600226
OpenAlexW4387950361

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.