Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40838022›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2025

Politricks: Teaching political tricks and discernment through active and passive tools.

Shaye-Ann M Hopkins, Rebecca M Rayburn-Reeves, Jan W Lindemans, Kathleen C O'Gorrman, Ian A Vandewalker, Caylin A Luebeck, Joseph J Sherlock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Shaye-Ann M HopkinsSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3560-7393
Rebecca M Rayburn-ReevesSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4224-9491
Jan W LindemansSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
Kathleen C O'GorrmanSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5434-0975
Ian A VandewalkerElections and Government, The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University, 120 Broadway #1750, New York, NY 10271, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-0152-868X
Caylin A LuebeckSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-5718-6485
Joseph J SherlockSocial Science Research Institute, Duke University, 2024 W Morgan St. Bay A Suite 200, Durham, NC 27705, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-3718-0373

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In an age of information overload, misinformation poses a growing threat to democracy. Inoculation theory suggests that exposing individuals to manipulation techniques can help build resistance to misinformation and improve their ability to discern such content over time. However, little research has directly compared the effectiveness of active learning tools, such as gamified interventions, to passive learning methods, like informational guides, for enhancing the detection of misinformation within important public issues, such as elections and climate change. To address this gap, we designed two tools aimed at enhancing users' ability to recognize manipulation strategies used to disseminate misinformation: an interactive game (

Indexed as

electiongamificationinoculationmanipulationmisinformation

Identifiers

PMID40838022
PMCPMC12363667

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.