IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/anname/v700y2022i1p136-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Psychological Inoculation against Misinformation: Current Evidence and Future Directions

Author

Listed:
  • Cecilie S. Traberg
  • Jon Roozenbeek
  • Sander van der Linden

Abstract

Much like a viral contagion, misinformation can spread rapidly from one individual to another. Inoculation theory offers a logical basis for developing a psychological “vaccine†against misinformation. We discuss the origins of inoculation theory, starting with its roots in the 1960s as a “vaccine for brainwash,†and detail the major theoretical and practical innovations that inoculation research has witnessed over the years. Specifically, we review a series of randomized lab and field studies that show that it is possible to preemptively “immunize†people against misinformation by preexposing them to severely weakened doses of the techniques that underlie its production along with ways on how to spot and refute them. We review evidence from interventions that we developed with governments and social media companies to help citizens around the world recognize and resist unwanted attempts to influence and mislead. We conclude with a discussion of important open questions about the effectiveness of inoculation interventions.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:anname:v:700:y:2022:i:1:p:136-151
    DOI: 10.1177/00027162221087936
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00027162221087936
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00027162221087936?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. Alemanno, Alberto, 2018. "How to Counter Fake News? A Taxonomy of Anti-Fake News Approaches," HEC Research Papers Series 1257, HEC Paris, revised 20 Apr 2018.
    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.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Gordon Pennycook & David G. Rand, 2022. "Nudging Social Media toward Accuracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 152-164, March.
    2. Gabriel Miao Li & Josh Pasek & Jon A. Krosnick & Tobias H. Stark & Jennifer Agiesta & Gaurav Sood & Trevor Tompson & Wendy Gross, 2022. "Americans’ Attitudes toward the Affordable Care Act: What Role Do Beliefs Play?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 700(1), pages 41-54, March.

    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. 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.
    2. Federico Vaccari, 2023. "Influential news and policy-making," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1363-1418, November.
    3. 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.
    4. Jinjin Ma & Yidi Chen & Huanya Zhu & Yiqun Gan, 2023. "Fighting COVID-19 Misinformation through an Online Game Based on the Inoculation Theory: Analyzing the Mediating Effects of Perceived Threat and Persuasion Knowledge," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(2), pages 1-18, January.
    5. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:849-882 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. 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.
    7. repec:jdm:journl:v:17:y:2022:i:4:p:849-882 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Sebastian Blesse & Friedrich Heinemann & Tommy Krieger, 2021. "Ökonomische Desinformation — Ursachen und Handlungsempfehlungen [Economic Disinformation — Causes and Recommendations for Action]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 101(12), pages 943-948, December.
    9. Ric Neo, 2021. "The International Discourses and Governance of Fake News," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 12(2), pages 214-228, April.
    10. 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.
    11. Blesse, Sebastian & Heinemann, Friedrich & Krieger, Tommy, 2021. "Informationsdefizite als Hindernis rationaler Wirtschaftspolitik: Ausmass, Ursachen und Gegenstrategien. Eine Studie mit Unterstützung der Brigitte Strube Stiftung," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 241989.
    12. 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.
    13. Elena-Alexandra Dumitru, 2020. "Testing Children and Adolescents’ Ability to Identify Fake News: A Combined Design of Quasi-Experiment and Group Discussions," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-12, September.
    14. Bermes, Alena, 2021. "Information overload and fake news sharing: A transactional stress perspective exploring the mitigating role of consumers’ resilience during COVID-19," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    15. 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.
    16. repec:cup:judgdm:v:17:y:2022:i:3:p:547-573 is not listed on IDEAS
    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. 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.
    19. Carl-Anton Werner Axelsson & Mona Guath & Thomas Nygren, 2021. "Learning How to Separate Fake from Real News: Scalable Digital Tutorials Promoting Students’ Civic Online Reasoning," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-18, February.
    20. Cun Fu & Jinru Zhang & Xin Kang, 2024. "True or false? Linguistic and demographic factors influence veracity judgment of COVID-19 rumors," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-7, December.
    21. Nan, Xiaoli & Wang, Yuan & Thier, Kathryn, 2022. "Why do people believe health misinformation and who is at risk? A systematic review of individual differences in susceptibility to health misinformation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    22. John A. List & Lina M. Ramírez & Julia Seither & Jaime Unda & Beatriz Vallejo, 2024. "Toward an Understanding of the Economics of Misinformation: Evidence from a Demand Side Field Experiment on Critical Thinking," NBER Working Papers 32367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Tobia Spampatti & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Evelina Trutnevyte & Tobias Brosch, 2024. "Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 380-398, February.

    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:sae:anname:v:700:y:2022:i:1:p:136-151. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.