Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
COVID-19 myth-busting: an experimental study.
Challenger, Aimée; Sumner, Petroc; Bott, Lewis.
Afiliação
  • Challenger A; School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK. challengera@cardiff.ac.uk.
  • Sumner P; School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
  • Bott L; School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK.
BMC Public Health ; 22(1): 131, 2022 01 19.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35045852
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

COVID-19 misinformation is a danger to public health. A range of formats are used by health campaigns to correct beliefs but data on their effectiveness is limited. We aimed to identify A) whether three commonly used myth-busting formats are effective for correcting COVID-19 myths, immediately and after a delay, and B) which is the most effective.

METHODS:

We tested whether three common correction formats could reduce beliefs in COVID-19 myths (i) question-answer, ii) fact-only, (ii) fact-myth. n = 2215 participants (n = 1291 after attrition), UK representative of age and gender, were randomly assigned to one of the three formats. n = 11 myths were acquired from fact-checker websites and piloted to ensure believability. Participants rated myth belief at baseline, were shown correction images (the intervention), and then rated myth beliefs immediately post-intervention and after a delay of at least 6 days. A partial replication, n = 2084 UK representative, was also completed with immediate myth rating only. Analysis used mixed models with participants and myths as random effects.

RESULTS:

Myth agreement ratings were significantly lower than baseline for all correction formats, both immediately and after the delay; all ß's > 0.30, p's < .001. Thus, all formats were effective at lowering beliefs in COVID-19 misinformation. Correction formats only differed where baseline myth agreement was high, with question-answer and fact-myth more effective than fact-only immediately; ß = 0.040, p = .022 (replication set ß = 0.053, p = .0075) and ß = - 0.051, p = .0059 (replication set ß = - 0.061, p < .001), respectively. After the delay however, question-answer was more effective than fact-myth, ß = 0.040, p =. 031.

CONCLUSION:

Our results imply that COVID-19 myths can be effectively corrected using materials and formats typical of health campaigns. Campaign designers can use our results to choose between correction formats. When myth belief was high, question-answer format was more effective than a fact-only format immediately post-intervention, and after delay, more effective than fact-myth format.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: COVID-19 Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: COVID-19 Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article