Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39183204›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2024

Don't believe them! Reducing misinformation influence through source discreditation.

Ullrich K H Ecker, Toby Prike, Antonia B Paver, Rosie J Scott, Briony Swire-Thompson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. The effects of social media criticism against public health institutions on trust, emotions, and social media engagement.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Ullrich K H EckerSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia (M304), Perth, 6009, Australia. ullrich.ecker@uwa.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0003-4743-313X
Toby PrikeSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia (M304), Perth, 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7602-4947
Antonia B PaverSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia (M304), Perth, 6009, Australia.
Rosie J ScottSchool of Psychological Science, University of Western Australia (M304), Perth, 6009, Australia.
Briony Swire-ThompsonCollege of Social Sciences and Humanities, Northeastern University, Boston, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7464-8940

Funding

Cancer misinformation on social media and its correctionR00CA248720 · NCI · NORTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY · PI SWIRE-THOMPSON, BRIONY · 2023 to 2024
$494k
Australian Research Council FT190100708NCI NIH HHS R00 CA248720NIH HHS R00CA248720
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Misinformation often continues to influence people's reasoning even after it has been corrected. Therefore, an important aim of applied cognition research is to identify effective measures to counter misinformation. One frequently recommended but hitherto insufficiently tested strategy is source discreditation, that is, attacking the credibility of a misinformation source. In two experiments, we tested whether immediate source discreditation could reduce people's subsequent reliance on fictional event-related misinformation. In Experiment 1, the discreditation targeted a person source of misinformation, pointing to a conflict of interest. This intervention was compared with a commonly employed message-focused correction and a combination of correction and discreditation. The discreditation alone was effective, but less effective than a correction, with the combination of both most effective. Experiment 2 compared discreditations that targeted a person versus a media source of misinformation, pointing either to a conflict of interest or a poor track record of communication. Discreditations were effective for both types of sources, although track-record discreditations were less effective when the misinformation source was a media outlet compared to a person. Results demonstrate that continued influence of misinformation is shaped by social as well as cognitive factors and that source discreditation is a broadly applicable misinformation countermeasure.

Indexed as

CommunicationAdultConflict of InterestDeceptionFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultContinued influence effectDebunkingDerogationDisinformationMisinformationSource discreditation

Identifiers

PMID39183204
PMCPMC11345350

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.