The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
When Debunking Scientific Myths Fails (and When It Does Not): The Backfire Effect in the Context of Journalistic Coverage and Immediate Judgments as Prevention Strategy
Open accessAbstract
When reporting scientific information, journalists often present common myths that are refuted with scientific facts. However, correcting misinformation this way is often not only ineffective but can increase the likelihood that people misremember it as true. We test this backfire effect in the context of journalistic coverage and examine how to counteract it. In a web-based experiment, we find evidence for a systematic backfire effect that occurs after a few minutes and strengthens after five days. Results show that forming judgments immediately during reception (in contrast to memory-based) can reduce backfire effects and prevent erroneous memory from affecting participants’ attitudes.
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?
In the citing paper
“However, repeating myths might contribute to increasing their acceptance due to their perceived familiarity [22, 23, 24].”
From Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies (2017) · cites this paper as [24]
In the citing paper
“Familiarity appears as a key determinant of this effect; indeed, when something seems familiar is easier to process and one is more inclined to believe it [24], regardless of whether the statement is factually true or false [22, 47] or was initially rated as credible or questionable [48].”
From Misinformation lingers in memory: Failure of three pro-vaccination strategies (2017) · cites this paper as [24]
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
The theory of planned behavior
Ajzen, I. (1991) · Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes · doi:10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-t · Cited by 90,587
From Intentions to Actions: A Theory of Planned Behavior
Ajzen, I. (1985) · Action Control · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-69746-3_2 · Cited by 19,057
Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1973) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(73)90033-9 · Cited by 9,984 · cited 1×
“This can result in different attitudes on the same issue at different points in time since memorybased judgments are prone to recency, availability, and salience effects (Hastie & Park, 1986; Tversky & Kahneman, 1973).”
BackgroundApplied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences
Kemp, F. (2003) · Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series D (The Statistician) · doi:10.1046/j.1467-9884.2003.t01-2-00383_4.x · Cited by 9,294
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60214-2 · Cited by 8,822 · cited 1×
“In this context, researchers have developed different models to describe two modes of cognitive processing and decision making (e.g., Chaiken, 1980; Kahneman & Frederick, 2002; Petty & Cacioppo, 1986), which are commonly labeled as dual process theories (Evans, 2008).”
Method(1999) · Cited by 6,104
Dual-Processing Accounts of Reasoning, Judgment, and Social Cognition
Evans, J. S. B. T. (2008) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629 · Cited by 5,137
Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment.
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2002) · Heuristics and Biases · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808098.004 · Cited by 3,476
When Corrections Fail: The Persistence of Political Misperceptions
Nyhan, B., & Reifler, J. (2010) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2 · Cited by 3,173
Processing Fluency and Aesthetic Pleasure: Is Beauty in the Perceiver's Processing Experience?
Reber, R., Schwarz, N., & Winkielman, P. (2004) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0804_3 · Cited by 3,149
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 10.1037/0278-7393.5.3.241 · DOI
- 10.1037/0096-3445.121.4.446 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0022-3514.39.5.572 · DOI
- Fishbein M., 2005, The handbook of attitudes, 173
- Hargreaves I., 2003, Towards a better map: Science, the public and the media
- Lavine H., 2002, Political psychology, 225
- Leiner D., 2012, Poster presented at the General Online Research Conference
- Leiner D. (2014). Convenience samples from online respondent pools: A case study of the SoSci Panel (Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/259669050_Convenience_Samples_from_Online_Respondent_Pools_A_case_study_of_the_SoSci_Panel
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–121 of 121
Reactions to the Message and Messenger
Paletz, S. B. F., Auxier, B. E., & Golonka, E. (2019) · SpringerBriefs in complexity · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-16413-3_3
How Do I Know from Whom I Need Permission and When I Have It?
Mitchell, I., & Guichon, J. R. (2019) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-22617-6_4
The role of Emotion Regulation on the link between False Memory and Decision Making
Voicu, T., Busuioc, A., Chirilă, A., & Nedelcu, M. (2020) · Studia Doctoralia · doi:10.47040/sd/sdpsych.v11i1.105
Children Requiring Emergency Health Care
Mitchell, I., & Guichon, J. R. (2021) · The International Library of Bioethics · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-86182-7_13
Persily, N., & Tucker, J. A. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.001
Persily, N., & Tucker, J. A. (2020) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108890960.015
The role of Emotion Regulation on the link between False Memory and Decision Making
Voicu, T., Busuioc, A., Chirilă, A., & Nedelcu, M. (2020) · doi:10.47040/sd0000080
Evidence for Spinozan "unbelieving" in the inferior prefrontal cortexPreprint
Bernhard, R. M., Frankland, S., Plunkett, D., Sievers, B., & Greene, J. D. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/bs9tf
Dan, V. (2022) · Studies in Communication Sciences · doi:10.24434/j.scoms.2022.01.3067
Xiong, Y. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.5002589
Understanding Dialogic Relationships in Digital Science Communication
Lerma-Mayer, A. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-1289-5_13
Virtual Visit to Research Reactor IPEN/MB-01
Coelho, H., & Sabundjian, G. (2025) · Brazilian Journal of Radiation Sciences · doi:10.15392/2319-0612.2024.2771
Till, B., Niederkrotenthaler, T., & Naderer, B. (2025) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/79917 · Cited by 1
Additional file 1 of Correction format has a limited role when debunking misinformation
Swire‐Thompson, B., Cook, J., Butler, L. H., Sanderson, J. A., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. H. (2021) · Figshare · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.17704552
Gosselin, S., Mortazavi, A., Li, Y., MacKay, M., Papadopoulos, A., Grant, L. E., Pancevski, A., Burton, K., & McWhirter, J. E. (2025) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/daaf214
Nibat, I. N., Trendel, O., Mai, R., Krüger, T., Lasarov, W., & Hoffmann, S. (2026) · International Journal of Research in Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.ijresmar.2026.03.007
Lee, J., Jung, L., & Hwang, J. L. (2026) · Science Communication · doi:10.1177/10755470261430253
Misinformation Aware Recommendation Algorithms with Trustworthy User Information
Ahmed, M. S., Pathak, R., & Spezzano, F. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems · doi:10.1145/3812650
Wahlheim, C. N., Kemp, P. L., & Loaiza, V. M. (2024) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints)
La Psicología de la Irracionalidad Epistémica: La Teoría de los Dos Procesos
Álvarez-Montero, F. J., Navarro, M. E. S., & López, J. C. L. (2025) · Sekkan · doi:10.68038/txdpas06
Metadata
- Authors
- Peter, C., & Koch, T.
- Affiliations
- Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Peter, Christina
- Venue
- Science Communication
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-10-25
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-25
- ISSN
- 0164-0259 (ISSN-L)
- 1075-5470
- 1552-8545
- OpenAlex
- W2341285149
- Cited by
- 124
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 1
- FWCI
- 14.37
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- Locations
- Science Communication (publishedVersion)
- Open access LMU (Ludwid Maxmilian's Universitat Munchen) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Misinformation and Its Impacts
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Climate Change Communication and Perception
- Social Sciences › Library and Information Sciences › Academic Publishing and Open Access
- Keywords
- backfire effect, debunking, scientific myths, misinformation, journalistic coverage, memory distortion, attitude change, misinformation correction
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
