The (Mis)Information Game: A social media simulator.

Given the potential negative impact reliance on misinformation can have, substantial effort has gone into understanding the factors that influence misinformation belief and propagation. However, despite the rise of social media often being cited as a fundamental driver of misinformation exposure and false beliefs, how people process misinformation on social media platforms has been under-investigated. This is partially due to a lack of adaptable and ecologically valid social media testing paradigms, resulting in an over-reliance on survey software and questionnaire-based measures. To provide researchers with a flexible tool to investigate the processing and sharing of misinformation on social media, this paper presents The Misinformation Game-an easily adaptable, open-source online testing platform that simulates key characteristics of social media. Researchers can customize posts (e.g., headlines, images), source information (e.g., handles, avatars, credibility), and engagement information (e.g., a post's number of likes and dislikes). The platform allows a range of response options for participants (like, share, dislike, flag) and supports comments. The simulator can also present posts on individual pages or in a scrollable feed, and can provide customized dynamic feedback to participants via changes to their follower count and credibility score, based on how they interact with each post. Notably, no specific programming skills are required to create studies using the simulator. Here, we outline the key features of the simulator and provide a non-technical guide for use by researchers. We also present results from two validation studies. All the source code and instructions are freely available online at https://misinfogame.com .

What Simon "knows" about cultural differences: The influence of cultural orientation and traffic directionality on spatial compatibility effects.

Previous research has suggested that culture influences perception and attention. These studies have typically involved comparisons of Westerners with East Asians, motivated by assumed differences in the cultures' self-concept or position on the individualism-collectivism spectrum. However, other potentially important sources of cultural variance have been neglected, such as differences in traffic directionality shaped by the urban spatial environment (i.e., left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). Thus, existing research may potentially place too much emphasis on self-concepts or the individualism-collectivism dimension in explaining observed cultural differences in cognition. The present study investigated spatial cognition using a Simon task and tested participants from four nations (Australia, China, Germany, and Malaysia) that differ in both cultural orientation (collectivistic vs. individualistic) and traffic directionality (left-hand vs. right-hand traffic). The task used two possible reference frames underlying the Simon effect: a body-centered one based on global stimulus position relative to the screen's center versus an object-centered one based on local stimulus position relative to a context object. As expected, all groups showed a reliable Simon effect for both spatial reference frames. However, the global Simon effect was larger in participants from countries with left-hand traffic. In contrast, the local Simon effect was modulated by differences in cultural orientation, with larger effects in participants from collectivistic cultures. This pattern suggests that both sources of cultural variation, viz. cultural orientation and traffic directionality, contribute to differences in spatial cognition in distinct ways.

Can you believe it? An investigation into the impact of retraction source credibility on the continued influence effect.

The continued influence effect refers to the finding that people often continue to rely on misinformation in their reasoning even if the information has been retracted. The present study aimed to investigate the extent to which the effectiveness of a retraction is determined by its credibility. In particular, we aimed to scrutinize previous findings suggesting that perceived trustworthiness but not perceived expertise of the retraction source determines a retraction's effectiveness, and that continued influence arises only if a retraction is not believed. In two experiments, we found that source trustworthiness but not source expertise indeed influences retraction effectiveness, with retractions from low-trustworthiness sources entirely ineffective. We also found that retraction belief is indeed a predictor of continued reliance on misinformation, but that substantial continued influence effects can still occur with retractions designed to be and rated as highly credible.

Keeping track of 'alternative facts': The neural correlates of processing misinformation corrections.

Upon receiving a correction, initially presented misinformation often continues to influence people's judgment and reasoning. Whereas some researchers believe that this so-called continued influence effect of misinformation (CIEM) simply arises from the insufficient encoding and integration of corrective claims, others assume that it arises from a competition between the correct information and the initial misinformation in memory. To examine these possibilities, we conducted two functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies. In each study, participants were asked to (a) read a series of brief news reports that contained confirmations or corrections of prior information and (b) evaluate whether subsequently presented memory probes matched the reports' correct facts rather than the initial misinformation. Both studies revealed that following correction-containing news reports, participants struggled to refute mismatching memory probes, especially when they referred to initial misinformation (as opposed to mismatching probes with novel information). We found little evidence, however, that the encoding of confirmations and corrections produced systematic neural processing differences indicative of distinct encoding strategies. Instead, we discovered that following corrections, participants exhibited increased activity in the left angular gyrus and the bilateral precuneus in response to mismatching memory probes that contained prior misinformation, compared to novel mismatch probes. These findings favour the notion that people's susceptibility to the CIEM arises from the concurrent retention of both correct and incorrect information in memory.

Not wallowing in misery - retractions of negative misinformation are effective in depressive rumination.

People often continue to rely on misinformation in their reasoning after they have acknowledged a retraction; this phenomenon is known as the continued-influence effect. Retractions can be particularly ineffective when the retracted misinformation is consistent with a pre-existing worldview. We investigated this effect in the context of depressive rumination. Given the prevalence of depressotypic worldviews in depressive rumination, we hypothesised that depressive rumination may affect the processing of retractions of valenced misinformation; specifically, we predicted that the retraction of negative misinformation might be less effective in depressive ruminators. In two experiments, we found evidence against this hypothesis: in depressive ruminators, retractions of negative misinformation were at least as effective as they were in control participants, and more effective than retractions of positive misinformation. Findings are interpreted in terms of an attentional bias that may enhance the salience of negative misinformation and may thus facilitate its updating in depressive rumination.

The mutation p.D313Y is associated with organ manifestation in Fabry disease.

Fabry disease (FD) is a multisystem lysosomal storage disorder caused by mutations in the GLA gene. The clinical significance of the mutation p.D313Y is still under debate. Retrospective chart analysis of clinical (neurological, cardiac, renal, and ophthalmological), genetic, and biochemical (lyso-globotriaosylsphingosine, lyso-Gb3; enzyme activity) data was performed in all our patients carrying the p.D313Y mutation. Fourteen patients from 5 families (10 female, 4 male; age range 10-51) were included. Symptoms and organ manifestations compatible with FD could be identified in 10 patients. Cerebrovascular events occurred in 4 females. Seven patients reported pain or acroparaesthesia. Cornea verticillata was found in 1 patient, mild retinal vascular tortuosity in 5 patients. Lyso-Gb3 was elevated in 2 females with cerebrovascular involvement. Classical cardiac, renal or skin manifestations could not be identified. The mutation p.D313Y in the GLA gene may lead to organ manifestations and elevation of the Fabry-specific biomarker lyso-Gb3. Neurological symptoms (stroke and pain) and ocular manifestations seem to be the leading findings. Annual routine visits are recommended for patients carrying the p.D313Y mutation. Enzyme replacement therapy might be considered in symptomatic patients.

Vaccination during concurrent subcutaneous immunotherapy: safety of simultaneous application.

BACKGROUND: During subcutaneous immunotherapy (SCIT), injections should be separated from vaccinations against infectious diseases by at least 1 week, because it is assumed that adverse reactions can result from the additional activation of the immune system. METARIAL AND METHODS: Data of a total of 875 individuals receiving SCIT and/or vaccination in one ENT-practice were included and analyzed retrospectively. 444 individuals had received vaccination against infectious diseases, 336 allergic patients received only SCIT. Moreover, 79 allergic patients had received vaccination and SCIT injections simultaneously on one day in different locations, while 16 patients inadvertently received SCIT injections within up to 4 days after vaccination. Some of the patients were observed for consecutive years receiving several vaccinations parallel to SCIT. Systemic reactions (SRs) during SCIT were classified according to the WAO (World Allergy Organization) grading. RESULTS: Patients exclusively receiving vaccinations did not report any drug-related SR. One SR third grade and two SRs second grade occurred in 3 asthmatic patients exclusively receiving SCIT. The patients simultaneously receiving vaccination and SCIT did not have any SR. This was also the case for the subjects consecutively receiving parallel SCIT and vaccination for up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: The international guidelines for allergen-specific immunotherapy (SIT) recommend an intermission of at least one week between SCIT and the administration of vaccines. However, these findings demonstrate the possibility to shorten or abolish this interval without increasing the risk of SRs.

Do people keep believing because they want to? Preexisting attitudes and the continued influence of misinformation.

Misinformation-defined as information that is initially assumed to be valid but is later corrected or retracted-often has an ongoing effect on people's memory and reasoning. We tested the hypotheses that (a) reliance on misinformation is affected by people's preexisting attitudes and (b) attitudes determine the effectiveness of retractions. In two experiments, participants scoring higher and lower on a racial prejudice scale read a news report regarding a robbery. In one scenario, the suspects were initially presented as being Australian Aboriginals, whereas in a second scenario, a hero preventing the robbery was introduced as an Aboriginal person. Later, these critical, race-related pieces of information were or were not retracted. We measured participants' reliance on misinformation in response to inferential reasoning questions. The results showed that preexisting attitudes influence people's use of attitude-related information but not the way in which a retraction of that information is processed.

Source-credibility information and social norms improve truth discernment and reduce engagement with misinformation online.

Misinformation on social media is a pervasive challenge. In this study (N = 415) a social-media simulation was used to test two potential interventions for countering misinformation: a credibility badge and a social norm. The credibility badge was implemented by associating accounts, including participants', with a credibility score. Participants' credibility score was dynamically updated depending on their engagement with true and false posts. To implement the social-norm intervention, participants were provided with both a descriptive norm (i.e., most people do not share misinformation) and an injunctive norm (i.e., sharing misinformation is the wrong thing to do). Both interventions were effective. The social-norm intervention led to reduced belief in false claims and improved discrimination between true and false claims. It also had some positive impact on social-media engagement, although some effects were not robust to alternative analysis specifications. The presence of credibility badges led to greater belief in true claims, lower belief in false claims, and improved discrimination. The credibility-badge intervention also had robust positive impacts on social-media engagement, leading to increased flagging and decreased liking and sharing of false posts. Cumulatively, the results suggest that both interventions have potential to combat misinformation and improve the social-media information landscape.

Nudge-based misinformation interventions are effective in information environments with low misinformation prevalence.

Nudge-based misinformation interventions are presented as cheap and effective ways to reduce the spread of misinformation online. However, despite online information environments typically containing relatively low volumes of misinformation, most studies testing the effectiveness of nudge interventions present equal proportions of true and false information. As the effectiveness of nudges can be highly context-dependent, it is imperative to validate the effectiveness of nudge-based interventions in environments with more realistic proportions of misinformation. The current study (N = 1387) assessed the effectiveness of a combined accuracy and social-norm nudge in simulated social-media environments with varying proportions of misinformation (50%, 20%, and 12.5%) relative to true and non-news-based (i.e., "social") information. The nudge intervention was effective at improving sharing discernment in conditions with lower proportions of misinformation, providing ecologically valid support for the use of nudge-based interventions to counter misinformation propagation on social media.

Helpful or harmful? The effect of a diagnostic label and its later retraction on person impressions.

Diagnostic labels for mental health conditions can inadvertently reinforce harmful stereotypes and exacerbate stigma. If a diagnosis is incorrect and a label is wrongly applied, this may negatively impact person impressions even if the inaccurate label is later corrected. This registered report examined this issue. Participants (N = 560) read a vignette about a hospital patient who was either diagnosed with schizophrenia, diagnosed with major depressive disorder, or not diagnosed with a mental health condition. The diagnostic labels were later retracted strongly, retracted weakly, or not retracted. Participants completed several stigma measures (desire for social distance, perceived dangerousness, and unpredictability), plus several inferential-reasoning measures that tested their reliance on the diagnostic label. As predicted, each mental health diagnosis elicited stigma, and influenced inferential reasoning. This effect was stronger for the schizophrenia diagnosis compared to the major depressive disorder diagnosis. Importantly, the diagnostic label continued to influence person judgments after a clear retraction (strong or weak), highlighting the limitations of corrections in reducing reliance on person-related misinformation and mental health stigma.

A seasonal comparison of a 14-day swing on cognitive function and psycho-physiological responses in mine service workers.

This study assessed the effect of season on cognitive function and psycho-physiological responses during a 14-day swing in mine-service workers. Cognitive function, thermal sensation and comfort, rating of perceived exertion, fatigue, hydration, core temperature and heart rate were assessed throughout a shift, on three separate days over a swing. Working memory and processing efficiency did not differ between seasons (p > 0.05), however counting and recall latencies improved throughout the swing (p < 0.05). Participants reported greater fatigue post-shift compared to pre-shift (p < 0.05). Thermal sensation, thermal comfort, and hydration were significantly elevated in summer compared to winter (p < 0.05). Specifically, workers were significantly/minimally dehydrated in summer/winter (urinary specific gravity = 1.025 ± 0.007/1.018 ± 0.007). Although cognitive function and thermal strain were not impaired in summer compared to winter, it is essential to reinforce worker's knowledge regarding hydration requirements. Additional education and/or incorporating scheduled rest breaks for hydration should be considered to ensure the health and safety of mine workers.

Don't believe them! Reducing misinformation influence through source discreditation.

Misinformation often continues to influence people's reasoning even after it has been corrected. Therefore, an important aim of applied cognition research is to identify effective measures to counter misinformation. One frequently recommended but hitherto insufficiently tested strategy is source discreditation, that is, attacking the credibility of a misinformation source. In two experiments, we tested whether immediate source discreditation could reduce people's subsequent reliance on fictional event-related misinformation. In Experiment 1, the discreditation targeted a person source of misinformation, pointing to a conflict of interest. This intervention was compared with a commonly employed message-focused correction and a combination of correction and discreditation. The discreditation alone was effective, but less effective than a correction, with the combination of both most effective. Experiment 2 compared discreditations that targeted a person versus a media source of misinformation, pointing either to a conflict of interest or a poor track record of communication. Discreditations were effective for both types of sources, although track-record discreditations were less effective when the misinformation source was a media outlet compared to a person. Results demonstrate that continued influence of misinformation is shaped by social as well as cognitive factors and that source discreditation is a broadly applicable misinformation countermeasure.

Toolbox of individual-level interventions against online misinformation.

The spread of misinformation through media and social networks threatens many aspects of society, including public health and the state of democracies. One approach to mitigating the effect of misinformation focuses on individual-level interventions, equipping policymakers and the public with essential tools to curb the spread and influence of falsehoods. Here we introduce a toolbox of individual-level interventions for reducing harm from online misinformation. Comprising an up-to-date account of interventions featured in 81 scientific papers from across the globe, the toolbox provides both a conceptual overview of nine main types of interventions, including their target, scope and examples, and a summary of the empirical evidence supporting the interventions, including the methods and experimental paradigms used to test them. The nine types of interventions covered are accuracy prompts, debunking and rebuttals, friction, inoculation, lateral reading and verification strategies, media-literacy tips, social norms, source-credibility labels, and warning and fact-checking labels.

Material risk: vitreoretinal surgery, evisceration, enucleation and sympathetic ophthalmia-where are we currently?

Sympathetic ophthalmia (SO) is known to occur after severe penetrating eye injury, evisceration and even enucleation surgery. Recent evidence suggests that a greater risk lies after multiple vitreoretinal procedures. The risk of SO following evisceration is only minimally greater than that following enucleation surgery. This review evaluates literature on SO to date and provides figures for the risk of developing SO for the purposes of the consent process. The issue of SO and Material Risk following vitreoretinal surgery is reviewed and figures for the purposes of consent are outlined. This is of particular relevance for patients in whom the contralateral eye is and will likely remain the better seeing eye. Sympathetic ophthalmitis is known to occur after severe penetrating eye injury, after evisceration and enucleation. More recently, sympathetic ophthalmitis has been recognised to occur after vitreoretinal surgery. This article reviews the evidence on material risk when consenting patients for elective and emergency eye procedures after ocular trauma or surgery. When a globe needs to be removed because of irreparable ocular injury, previous publications dictated the procedure to be an enucleation because of the fear of an increased risk of SO after an evisceration. Perhaps the issue of material risk of sympathetic ophthalmia (SO) remains over-emphasised by ophthalmic plastic surgeons and under-recognised by vitreoretinal surgeons during the consent process for evisceration, enucleation and vitreoretinal surgery. Antecedent trauma and number of previous surgeries may actually be a more significant risk factor than the type of eye removal. Recent medicolegal cases also help us understand the importance of the discussion of this risk. We present our current understanding of the risk of SO after different procedures and suggest how this information may be included in a patient consent.

Effective correction of misinformation.

This paper reviews correction effectiveness, highlighting which factors matter, which do not, and where further research is needed. To boost effectiveness, we recommend using detailed corrections and providing an alternative explanation wherever possible. We also recommend providing a reminder of the initial misinformation and repeating the correction. Presenting corrections pre-emptively (i.e., prebunking) or after misinformation exposure is unlikely to greatly impact correction effectiveness. There is also limited risk of repeating misinformation within a correction or that a correction will inadvertently spread misinformation to new audiences. Further research is needed into which correction formats are most effective, whether boosting correction memorability can enhance effectiveness, the effectiveness of discrediting a misinformation source, and whether distrusted correction sources can contribute to corrections backfiring.

Examining the replicability of backfire effects after standalone corrections.

Corrections are a frequently used and effective tool for countering misinformation. However, concerns have been raised that corrections may introduce false claims to new audiences when the misinformation is novel. This is because boosting the familiarity of a claim can increase belief in that claim, and thus exposing new audiences to novel misinformation-even as part of a correction-may inadvertently increase misinformation belief. Such an outcome could be conceptualized as a familiarity backfire effect, whereby a familiarity boost increases false-claim endorsement above a control-condition or pre-correction baseline. Here, we examined whether standalone corrections-that is, corrections presented without initial misinformation exposure-can backfire and increase participants' reliance on the misinformation in their subsequent inferential reasoning, relative to a no-misinformation, no-correction control condition. Across three experiments (total N = 1156) we found that standalone corrections did not backfire immediately (Experiment 1) or after a one-week delay (Experiment 2). However, there was some mixed evidence suggesting corrections may backfire when there is skepticism regarding the correction (Experiment 3). Specifically, in Experiment 3, we found the standalone correction to backfire in open-ended responses, but only when there was skepticism towards the correction. However, this did not replicate with the rating scales measure. Future research should further examine whether skepticism towards the correction is the first replicable mechanism for backfire effects to occur.

Correcting vaccine misinformation: A failure to replicate familiarity or fear-driven backfire effects.

Individuals often continue to rely on misinformation in their reasoning and decision making even after it has been corrected. This is known as the continued influence effect, and one of its presumed drivers is misinformation familiarity. As continued influence can promote misguided or unsafe behaviours, it is important to find ways to minimize the effect by designing more effective corrections. It has been argued that correction effectiveness is reduced if the correction repeats the to-be-debunked misinformation, thereby boosting its familiarity. Some have even suggested that this familiarity boost may cause a correction to inadvertently increase subsequent misinformation reliance; a phenomenon termed the familiarity backfire effect. A study by Pluviano et al. (2017) found evidence for this phenomenon using vaccine-related stimuli. The authors found that repeating vaccine "myths" and contrasting them with corresponding facts backfired relative to a control condition, ironically increasing false vaccine beliefs. The present study sought to replicate and extend this study. We included four conditions from the original Pluviano et al. study: the myths vs. facts, a visual infographic, a fear appeal, and a control condition. The present study also added a "myths-only" condition, which simply repeated false claims and labelled them as false; theoretically, this condition should be most likely to produce familiarity backfire. Participants received vaccine-myth corrections and were tested immediately post-correction, and again after a seven-day delay. We found that the myths vs. facts condition reduced vaccine misconceptions. None of the conditions increased vaccine misconceptions relative to control at either timepoint, or relative to a pre-intervention baseline; thus, no backfire effects were observed. This failure to replicate adds to the mounting evidence against familiarity backfire effects and has implications for vaccination communications and the design of debunking interventions.

Would I lie to you? Party affiliation is more important than Brexit in processing political misinformation.

In recent years, the UK has become divided along two key dimensions: party affiliation and Brexit position. We explored how division along these two dimensions interacts with the correction of political misinformation. Participants saw accurate and inaccurate statements (either balanced or mostly inaccurate) from two politicians from opposing parties but the same Brexit position (Experiment 1), or the same party but opposing Brexit positions (Experiment 2). Replicating previous work, fact-checking statements led participants to update their beliefs, increasing belief after fact affirmations and decreasing belief for corrected misinformation, even for politically aligned material. After receiving fact-checks participants had reduced voting intentions and more negative feelings towards party-aligned politicians (likely due to low baseline support for opposing party politicians). For Brexit alignment, the opposite was found: participants reduced their voting intentions and feelings for opposing (but not aligned) politicians following the fact-checks. These changes occurred regardless of the proportion of inaccurate statements, potentially indicating participants expect politicians to be accurate more than half the time. Finally, although we found division based on both party and Brexit alignment, effects were much stronger for party alignment, highlighting that even though new divisions have emerged in UK politics, the old divides remain dominant.