IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0299139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Enhancing misinformation correction: New variants and a combination of awareness training and counter-speech to mitigate belief perseverance bias

Author

Listed:
  • Jana Siebert
  • Johannes Ulrich Siebert

Abstract

Belief perseverance bias refers to individuals’ tendency to persevere in biased opinions even after the misinformation that initially shaped those opinions has been retracted. This study contributes to research on reducing the negative impact of misinformation by mitigating the belief perseverance bias. The study explores the previously proposed awareness-training and counter-speech debiasing techniques, further developing them by introducing new variants and combining them. We investigate their effectiveness in mitigating the belief perseverance bias after the retraction of misinformation related to a real-life issue in an experiment involving N = 876 individuals, of whom 364 exhibit belief perseverance bias. The effectiveness of the debiasing techniques is assessed by measuring the difference between the baseline opinions before exposure to misinformation and the opinions after exposure to a debiasing technique. Our study confirmed the effectiveness of the awareness-training and counter-speech debiasing techniques in mitigating the belief perseverance bias, finding no discernible differences in the effectiveness between the previously proposed and the new variants. Moreover, we observed that the combination of awareness training and counter-speech is more effective in mitigating the belief perseverance bias than the single debiasing techniques.

Suggested Citation

  • Jana Siebert & Johannes Ulrich Siebert, 2024. "Enhancing misinformation correction: New variants and a combination of awareness training and counter-speech to mitigate belief perseverance bias," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(2), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299139
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299139
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0299139&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0299139?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, Haifeng, 2017. "A War of (Mis)Information: The Political Effects of Rumors and Rumor Rebuttals in an Authoritarian Country," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 47(2), pages 283-311, April.
    2. Jon Roozenbeek & Sander Linden, 2019. "Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-10, December.
    3. Gordon Pennycook & Adam Bear & Evan T. Collins & David G. Rand, 2020. "The Implied Truth Effect: Attaching Warnings to a Subset of Fake News Headlines Increases Perceived Accuracy of Headlines Without Warnings," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(11), pages 4944-4957, November.
    4. Nyhan, Brendan & Reifler, Jason, 2015. "Displacing Misinformation about Events: An Experimental Test of Causal Corrections," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(1), pages 81-93, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cameron Martel & Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2021. "You’re Definitely Wrong, Maybe: Correction Style Has Minimal Effect on Corrections of Misinformation Online," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 120-133.
    2. Cameron Martel & Mohsen Mosleh & David G. Rand, 2021. "You’re Definitely Wrong, Maybe: Correction Style Has Minimal Effect on Corrections of Misinformation Online," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(1), pages 120-133.
    3. Jay J. Van Bavel & Katherine Baicker & Paulo S. Boggio & Valerio Capraro & Aleksandra Cichocka & Mina Cikara & Molly J. Crockett & Alia J. Crum & Karen M. Douglas & James N. Druckman & John Drury & Oe, 2020. "Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 460-471, May.
    4. Eric K. Clemons & Andrej Savin & Maximilian Schreieck & Stina Teilmann-Lock & Jan Trzaskowski & Ravi Waran, 2024. "A face of one’s own: The role of an online personae in a digital age and the right to control one’s own online personae in the presence of digital hacking," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 34(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Garrett Morrow & Briony Swire‐Thompson & Jessica Montgomery Polny & Matthew Kopec & John P. Wihbey, 2022. "The emerging science of content labeling: Contextualizing social media content moderation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(10), pages 1365-1386, October.
    6. Jon Roozenbeek & Stefan M. Herzog & Michael Geers & Ralf Kurvers & Mubashir Sultan & Sander van der Linden, 2022. "Susceptibility to misinformation is consistent across question framings and response modes and better explained by myside bias and partisanship than analytical thinking," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 17(3), pages 547-573, May.
    7. Roger D. Magarey & Christina M. Trexler, 2020. "Information: a missing component in understanding and mitigating social epidemics," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    8. Felix Chopra & Ingar K. Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2021. "The Demand for Fact-Checking," CESifo Working Paper Series 9061, CESifo.
    9. Theiss Bendixen, 2020. "How cultural evolution can inform the science of science communication—and vice versa," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-10, December.
    10. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:547-573 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Lu, Peng, 2019. "Heterogeneity, judgment, and social trust of agents in rumor spreading," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 350(C), pages 447-461.
    12. Cecilie S. Traberg & Jon Roozenbeek & Sander van der Linden, 2022. "Psychological Inoculation against Misinformation: Current Evidence and Future Directions," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 136-151, March.
    13. Emeric Henry & Ekaterina Zhuravskaya & Sergei Guriev, 2022. "Checking and Sharing Alt-Facts," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 55-86, August.
    14. John M. Carey & Andrew M. Guess & Peter J. Loewen & Eric Merkley & Brendan Nyhan & Joseph B. Phillips & Jason Reifler, 2022. "The ephemeral effects of fact-checks on COVID-19 misperceptions in the United States, Great Britain and Canada," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(2), pages 236-243, February.
    15. Chopra, Felix & Haaland, Ingar & Roth, Christopher, 2022. "Do people demand fact-checked news? Evidence from U.S. Democrats," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    16. Cerasel O. Cuteanu & Ciprian Marcel Pop & Angela-Eliza Micu, 2025. "Systematic Review and Research Agenda Emphasizing Persuasion Knowledge Model as an Alternative Tool That Can Mitigate the Effect of Fake News on Consumers’ Intention to Adopt an Innovation," Economics and Applied Informatics, "Dunarea de Jos" University of Galati, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration, issue 1, pages 184-193.
    17. Philipp Lorenz-Spreen & Stephan Lewandowsky & Cass R. Sunstein & Ralph Hertwig, 2020. "How behavioural sciences can promote truth, autonomy and democratic discourse online," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(11), pages 1102-1109, November.
    18. Tuval Danenberg & Drew Fudenberg, 2024. "Endogenous Attention and the Spread of False News," Papers 2406.11024, arXiv.org.
    19. Danielle Caled & Mário J. Silva, 2022. "Digital media and misinformation: An outlook on multidisciplinary strategies against manipulation," Journal of Computational Social Science, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 123-159, May.
    20. Thomas Renault & David Restrepo Amariles & Aurore Troussel, 2024. "Collaboratively adding context to social media posts reduces the sharing of false news," Papers 2404.02803, arXiv.org.
    21. Folco Panizza & Piero Ronzani & Tiffany Morisseau & Simone Mattavelli & Carlo Martini, 2023. "How do online users respond to crowdsourced fact-checking?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0299139. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.