The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Debunking: A Meta-Analysis of the Psychological Efficacy of Messages Countering Misinformation
Open accessAbstract
This meta-analysis investigated the factors underlying effective messages to counter attitudes and beliefs based on misinformation. Because misinformation can lead to poor decisions about consequential matters and is persistent and difficult to correct, debunking it is an important scientific and public-policy goal. This meta-analysis ( k = 52, N = 6,878) revealed large effects for presenting misinformation ( ds = 2.41–3.08), debunking ( ds = 1.14–1.33), and the persistence of misinformation in the face of debunking ( ds = 0.75–1.06). Persistence was stronger and the debunking effect was weaker when audiences generated reasons in support of the initial misinformation. A detailed debunking message correlated positively with the debunking effect. Surprisingly, however, a detailed debunking message also correlated positively with the misinformation-persistence effect.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“meta-analytic studies show that corrections are generally effective in reducing misperceptions (Chan et al., 2017;Walter and Murphy, 2018).”
From Factual belief polarization between Democrats and Republicans: source or epiphenomenon of ideological and affective polarization? (2024) · cites this paper as Chan et al., 2017
In the citing paper
“misinformation often persist after being exposed to corrective messages (Chan et al., 2017)”
From The fingerprints of misinformation: how deceptive content differs from reliable sources in terms of cognitive effort and appeal to emotions (2022) · cites this paper as Chan et al., 2017
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Muller, K. E., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Technometrics · doi:10.2307/1270020 · Cited by 99,603
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: the PRISMA statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & for the PRISMA Group (2009) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.b2535 · Cited by 83,823
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group (2009) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097 · Cited by 64,042
Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.).
Lachenbruch, P. A., & Cohen, J. (1989) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.2307/2290095 · Cited by 37,421
Wang, G., Ma, R., Qiao, G., Wada, K., Aizawa, Y., & Satoh, T. (2015) · Integrative Medicine International · doi:10.1159/000368408 · Cited by 18,762
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009) · doi:10.1002/9780470743386 · Cited by 14,225
(1999) · Cited by 6,104
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
Encyclopedia of human behavior
(1994) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.32-0638 · Cited by 3,250
Outlier and influence diagnostics for meta-analysis
Viechtbauer, W., & Cheung, M. W.-L. (2010) · Research Synthesis Methods · doi:10.1002/jrsm.11 · Cited by 2,949
Misinformation and Its Correction: Continued Influence and Successful Debiasing
Lewandowsky, S., Ecker, U. K. H., Seifert, C. M., Schwarz, N., & Cook, J. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612451018 · Cited by 2,920
Peters, J. L., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., & Rushton, L. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.010 · Cited by 2,053
Feeling validated versus being correct: A meta-analysis of selective exposure to information
Hart, W., Albarracín, D., Eagly, A. H., Brechan, I., Lindberg, M. J., & Merrill, L. (2009) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0015701 · Cited by 1,292
Self-citationEstimation of a Single Effect Size: Parametric and Nonparametric Methods
Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985) · Statistical Methods for Meta-Analysis · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-057065-5.50010-5 · Cited by 983
Political Parties, Motivated Reasoning, and Issue Framing Effects
Slothuus, R., & de Vreese, C. H. (2010) · The Journal of Politics · doi:10.1017/s002238161000006x · Cited by 736
Sterne, J. A. C., & Harbord, R. M. (2004) · The Stata Journal: Promoting communications on statistics and Stata · doi:10.1177/1536867x0400400204 · Cited by 708
Grey literature in meta-analyses of randomized trials of health care interventions
Hopewell, S., McDonald, S., Clarke, M. J., & Egger, M. (2007) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.mr000010.pub3 · Cited by 598
Sources of the continued influence effect: when misinformation in memory affects later inferences
Johnson, H. M., & Seifert, C. M. (1994) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.20.6.1420 · Cited by 560
Explicit warnings reduce but do not eliminate the continued influence of misinformation
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., & Tang, D. (2010) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/mc.38.8.1087 · Cited by 519
Duval, S. (2005) · Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis · doi:10.1002/0470870168.ch8 · Cited by 496
Publication Bias in Research Synthesis: Sensitivity Analysis Using A Priori Weight Functions.
Vevea, J. L., & Woods, C. M. (2005) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.10.4.428 · Cited by 461 · cited 1×
“Next, we performed the bias tests using selection models (Vevea & Woods, 2005), which are weightfunction models accounting for the fact that not all effect sizes have the same probability of being published.”
MethodSchwarz, N., Sanna, L. J., Skurnik, I., & Yoon, C. (2007) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)39003-x · Cited by 441
Advanced social psychology: The state of the science
Baumeister, R. F., & Finkel, E. J. (2010) · Cited by 408
McShane, B. B., Böckenholt, U., & Hansen, K. T. (2016) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691616662243 · Cited by 398
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Swire‐Thompson, B., & Chang, D. (2011) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0065-1 · Cited by 386
Simonsohn, U., Simmons, J. P., & Nelson, L. D. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000104 · Cited by 343
Meta-analysis using effect size distributions of only statistically significant studies.
van Assen, M. A. L. M., van Aert, R. C. M., & Wicherts, J. M. (2015) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/met0000025 · Cited by 265
Cognitive Biases and the Strength of Political Arguments
Arceneaux, K. (2012) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5907.2011.00573.x · Cited by 256
Editing episodic memory following the identification of error
Wilkes, A. L., & Leatherbarrow, M. (1988) · The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A · doi:10.1080/02724988843000168 · Cited by 217
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Fenton, O., & Martin, K. (2013) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0358-x · Cited by 200
Why the "Death Panel" Myth Wouldn't Die: Misinformation in the Health Care Reform Debate
Nyhan, B. J. (2010) · The Forum · doi:10.2202/1540-8884.1354 · Cited by 198
The Effect of Refuting Misconceptions in the Introductory Psychology Class
Kowalski, P., & Taylor, A. K. (2009) · Teaching of Psychology · doi:10.1080/00986280902959986 · Cited by 192
Issue Framing and Engagement: Rhetorical Strategy in Public Policy Debates
Jerit, J. (2007) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-007-9041-x · Cited by 175
Mental models and probabilistic thinking
Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1994) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90028-0 · Cited by 175
Assessing Publication Bias in Meta-Analyses in the Presence of Between-Study Heterogeneity
Peters, J., Sutton, A. J., Jones, D. R., Abrams, K. R., Rushton, L., & Moreno, S. G. (2010) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A (Statistics in Society) · doi:10.1111/j.1467-985x.2009.00629.x · Cited by 169
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., & Apai, J. (2010) · Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1080/17470218.2010.497927 · Cited by 143
Avoiding Bias in Publication Bias Research: The Value of “Null” Findings
Kepes, S., Banks, G. C., & Oh, I. (2012) · Journal of Business and Psychology · doi:10.1007/s10869-012-9279-0 · Cited by 132
Arceneaux, K., Johnson, M., & Cryderman, J. (2013) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2012.737424 · Cited by 126
Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Oberauer, K., Brophy, S., Lloyd, E. A., & Marriott, M. (2015) · Journal of Social and Political Psychology · doi:10.5964/jspp.v3i1.443 · Cited by 111
Inzlicht, M., Gervais, W., & Berkman, E. (2015) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2659409 · Cited by 82
Damme, I. V., & Smets, K. (2013) · Emotion · doi:10.1037/a0034629 · Cited by 69
Culturally transmitted misbeliefs
Sperber, D. (2009) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x09991348 · Cited by 31
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Johnson-Laird P. N., 2013, Cognitive consistency: A unifying concept in social psychology, 225
- Johnson-Laird P. N., 1991, Deduction
- *Thorson E. A. (2013). Belief echoes: The persistent effects of corrected misinformation (Doctoral dissertation, University of Pennsylvania). Retrieved from http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3564225
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The psychological drivers of misinformation belief and its resistance to correction
Ecker, U. K. H., Lewandowsky, S., Cook, J., Schmid, P., Fazio, L. K., Brashier, N., Kendeou, P., Vraga, E. K., & Amazeen, M. A. (2022) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-021-00006-y · Cited by 1,372
Conspiracy theories as barriers to controlling the spread of COVID-19 in the U.S.
Römer, D., & Jamieson, K. H. (2020) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113356 · Cited by 1,065
Countering Misinformation and Fake News Through Inoculation and Prebunking
Lewandowsky, S., & van der Linden, S. (2021) · European Review of Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/10463283.2021.1876983 · Cited by 773
Fake news game confers psychological resistance against online misinformation
Roozenbeek, J., & van der Linden, S. (2019) · Palgrave Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-019-0279-9 · Cited by 708
Fact-checking: a meta-analysis of what works and for whom
Walter, N., Cohen, J., Holbert, R. L., & Morag, Y. (2020) · Political Communication · doi:10.1080/10584609.2019.1668894 · Cited by 690
Metadata
- Authors
- Chan, M.-P. S., Jones, C. R., Hall Jamieson, K., & Albarracín, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- The Annenberg Public Policy Center, University of Pennsylvania
- Corresponding author
- Chan, Man-pui Sally
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2017-09-12
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 1531-1546
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- PMC
- PMC5673564
- OpenAlex
- W2754477858
- Cited by
- 898
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 81 · 2025: 117 · 2024: 112 · 2023: 93 · 2022: 142 · 2021: 114 · 2020: 93 · 2019: 85 · 2018: 58 · 2017: 3
- FWCI
- 20.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH094241)
- National Cancer Institute (P50CA179546)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
- Keywords
- debunking, misinformation, belief revision, attitude change, misinformation correction
- MeSH terms
- Attitude, Communication, Humans, Thinking
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
