ArticleScientific reports2025
The impact of interventions against science disinformation in high school students.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work studies the effectiveness of three educational interventions (Civic Online Reasoning (COR), Cognitive Biases (CB), and Inoculation (INOC)) in helping high school students identify science disinformation. We conducted the experiments in classrooms in Northern Italy, the study employed an ecological design with real-world stimuli and a digital cellphone-based platform, engaging 2,288 students. Participants evaluated Instagram posts containing scientific and pseudoscientific content before and after the interventions. While previous research shows the efficacy of these techniques in controlled environments, this study found no significant improvement in students' ability to discern accurate information. However, COR indirectly enhanced accuracy by promoting lateral reading and click restraint, albeit among a small subset. Conversely, the INOC approach increased generalised skepticism, leading to reduced trust in scientifically valid content. We observe that unlike in non-ecological environments, the classroom environment poses challenges, including distractions and varied engagement, highlighting the difficulty of scaling interventions from controlled to real-world settings. Despite these results, the study underscores the importance of refining educational strategies and adapting them to dynamic, real-world contexts to enhance digital literacy.
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.