Game-based inoculation versus graphic-based inoculation to combat misinformation: a randomized controlled trial.
Game-based intervention
Graphic-based intervention
Inoculation
Misinformation
Journal
Cognitive research: principles and implications
ISSN: 2365-7464
Titre abrégé: Cogn Res Princ Implic
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101697632
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
31 07 2023
31 07 2023
Historique:
received:
11
04
2023
accepted:
17
07
2023
medline:
3
8
2023
pubmed:
1
8
2023
entrez:
31
7
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Misinformation affects various aspects of people's lives, such as politics, entertainment, and social interactions. However, effective intervention measures to combat misinformation are lacking. The inoculation theory has become a prevalent measure of misinformation. This study employed inoculation theory and developed an interactive game to help the public counter misinformation. In this game, players take on the role of the misinformation spreader, intending to add more followers to their virtual accounts using different strategies. A total of 180 Chinese participants were randomly assigned to game-based inoculation, graphic-based inoculation, and control groups. The results indicated that both types of inoculation interventions significantly decreased the perceived credibility and sharing intention of misinformation. Game-based inoculation was more effective than graphic-based inoculation in terms of misinformation perceived credibility, and the intervention effects were stable after 2 weeks. The graphic-based inoculation contained the sleeper effect, which interventions required a period of time to take effect. Neither inoculation produced countereffects on perceived credibility and nor sharing intention of accurate information.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37525071
doi: 10.1186/s41235-023-00505-x
pii: 10.1186/s41235-023-00505-x
pmc: PMC10390387
doi:
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
49Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
PLoS One. 2019 Jan 30;14(1):e0210746
pubmed: 30699155
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2021 Mar;24(3):188-193
pubmed: 33646021
Nat Med. 2022 Mar;28(3):460-467
pubmed: 35273402
Comput Human Behav. 2022 Mar;128:107111
pubmed: 34866771
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2019 Apr 16;116(16):7662-7669
pubmed: 30642953
Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2020 Aug 26;5(1):41
pubmed: 32844338
Science. 2021 Dec 03;374(6572):abm0829
pubmed: 34648302
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
Span J Psychol. 2021 Apr 12;24:e25
pubmed: 33840397
Psychol Bull. 2004 Jan;130(1):143-72
pubmed: 14717653
Nature. 2021 Apr;592(7855):590-595
pubmed: 33731933
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Jul 7;117(27):15536-15545
pubmed: 32571950
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2021 Mar;27(1):1-16
pubmed: 33017160
Psychol Sci. 2020 Jul;31(7):770-780
pubmed: 32603243
Chaos Solitons Fractals. 2020 Nov;140:110123
pubmed: 32834635
Alcohol. 2020 Nov;88:29-32
pubmed: 32693023
Curr Opin Psychol. 2022 Oct;47:101394
pubmed: 35863102
Bull World Health Organ. 2021 Jun 01;99(6):455-463A
pubmed: 34108756
Annu Rev Psychol. 2019 Jan 4;70:531-549
pubmed: 30231003
Behav Res Methods. 2023 Jun 29;:
pubmed: 37382812
J Med Internet Res. 2021 Oct 14;23(10):e32425
pubmed: 34581678
SSM Popul Health. 2021 Dec 23;17:101009
pubmed: 35036514
Vaccines (Basel). 2022 Sep 22;10(10):
pubmed: 36298459