CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 323Misinformation and Its ImpactsDeception detection and forensic psychologySocial and Intergroup Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 98 of the 98 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Long-term effectiveness of inoculation against misinformation: Three longitudinal experiments.

Open access
Maertens, Rakoen, Roozenbeek, Jon, Basol, Melisa, van der Linden, Sander·2021·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
DOI 10.1037/xap0000315
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

= 170), participants played either Bad News (inoculation group) or Tetris (gamified control group) and rated the reliability of news headlines that either used a misinformation technique or not. We found that participants rate fake news as significantly less reliable after the intervention. In Experiment 1, we assessed participants at regular intervals to explore the longevity of this effect and found that the inoculation effect remains stable for at least 3 months. In Experiment 2, we sought to replicate these findings without regular testing and found significant decay over a 2-month time period so that the long-term inoculation effect was no longer significant. In Experiment 3, we replicated the inoculation effect and investigated whether long-term effects could be due to item-response memorization or the fake-to-real ratio of items presented, but found that this is not the case. We discuss implications for inoculation theory and psychological research on misinformation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/xap0000315

Cites

98 of 98 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 97 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–323 of 323

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Maertens, R., Roozenbeek, J., Basol, M., & van der Linden, S.
Affiliations
University of Cambridge (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2021-03
Volume
27
Issue
1
Pages
1-16
ISSN
  • 1076-898X (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2192
DOI
10.1037/xap0000315
OpenAlex
W3089476379
Semantic Scholar
6099649830c65c02b4008f5e57a18ebd8332a2ee
Cited by
321
References
97
Citations by year
2026: 45 · 2025: 58 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 69 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 34
FWCI
52.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Apollo (University of Cambridge) (submittedVersion)
  • Apollo
Funders
  • Cambridge Trust
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/V011960/1, 2268886)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
Keywords
inoculation theory, misinformation, fake news, long-term effects, gamification, Tetris
MeSH terms
Communication, Humans, Deception, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review