ArticleNature human behaviour2024
Prominent misinformation interventions reduce misperceptions but increase scepticism.
Article in Nature human behaviour, 2024. 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 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Spotting false news and doubting true news: a systematic review and meta-analysis of news judgements.Nature human behaviour · 2025Pooled it
- Effectiveness of an online vaccine misinformation game for Arabic-speaking Australians: a randomized controlled trial.Frontiers in public health · 2026Trial
- Using a mental model approach to undercut the effects of exposure to mRNA vaccination misconceptions: Two randomized trials.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Trial
- Specific media literacy tips improve AI-generated visual misinformation discernment.Cognitive research: principles and implications · 2025Trial
- A Health Media Literacy Intervention Increases Skepticism of Both Inaccurate and Accurate Cancer News Among U.S. Adults.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2024Trial
- Community structure-regulation coupling reveals optimal information diffusion.Nature communications · 2026Article
- PROTOCOL: Interventions Targeting Misinformation, Disinformation and Malinformation for Reducing and Countering Violent Extremism: A Systematic Review.Campbell systematic reviews · 2026Review
- Video inoculation against election misinformation across 12 EU nations.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Ad-based social media interventions increase belief accuracy and generate pro-social opinions among non-news readers.PloS one · 2026Article
- From emergence to amplification: an analysis of lifecycle models to address health mis-disinformation in the digital environment.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Review
- The paradox of AI content labeling: how clarity influences information avoidance via cognitive dissonance on social platforms.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Following news on social media boosts knowledge, belief accuracy and trust.Nature human behaviour · 2025Article
- Bypassing versus correcting misinformation: Efficacy and fundamental processes.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2025Article
- Investigating the long-term impact of misinformation interventions in upper secondary education.PloS one · 2025Article
- Article
- Media literacy tips promoting reliable news improve discernment and enhance trust in traditional media.Communications psychology · 2024Article
- On manipulation by emotional AI: UK adults' views and governance implications.Frontiers in sociology · 2024Article
- Using psychological science to understand and fight health misinformation: An APA consensus statement.The American psychologistReview
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Current interventions to combat misinformation, including fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation, may have unintended consequences for democracy. We propose that these interventions may increase scepticism towards all information, including accurate information. Across three online survey experiments in three diverse countries (the United States, Poland and Hong Kong; total n = 6,127), we tested the negative spillover effects of existing strategies and compared them with three alternative interventions against misinformation. We examined how exposure to fact-checking, media literacy tips and media coverage of misinformation affects individuals' perception of both factual and false information, as well as their trust in key democratic institutions. Our results show that while all interventions successfully reduce belief in false information, they also negatively impact the credibility of factual information. This highlights the need for further improved strategies that minimize the harms and maximize the benefits of interventions against misinformation.
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.