ArticleCommunications psychology2024
Social corrections act as a double-edged sword by reducing the perceived accuracy of false and real news in the UK, Germany, and Italy.
Article in Communications psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The psychology of health.Communications psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Corrective or refutational posts from ordinary users on social media have the potential to improve the online information ecosystem. While initial evidence of these social corrections is promising, a better understanding of the effects across different topics, formats, and audiences is needed. In three pre-registered experiments (N = 1944 UK, N = 2467 Italy, N = 2210 Germany) where respondents completed a social media post assessment task with false and true news posts on various topics (e.g., health, climate change, technology), we find that social corrections reduce perceived accuracy of and engagement with false news posts. We also find that social corrections that flag true news as false decrease perceived accuracy of and engagement with true news posts. We did not find evidence to support moderation of these effects by correction strength, anti-expert sentiments, cognitive reflection capacities, or susceptibility to social influence. While social corrections can be effective for false news, they may also undermine belief in true news.
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.