How to unring the bell: A meta-analytic approach to correction of misinformation

Abstract

The study reports on a meta-analysis of attempts to correct misinformation (k=65). Results indicate that corrective messages have a moderate influence on belief in misinformation (r=.35); however, it is more difficult to correct for misinformation in the context of politics (r=.15) and marketing (r=.18) than health (r=.27). Correction of real-world misinformation is more challenging (r=.14), as opposed to constructed misinformation (r=.48). Rebuttals (r=.38) are more effective than forewarnings (r=.16), and appeals to coherence (r=.55) outperform fact-checking (r=.25), and appeals to credibility (r=.14).