When scientific sources fail to convince: evidence-oriented thinking enhances the effectiveness of science-based corrections

This research demonstrates that citing scientific sources to correct disinformation can be ineffective or even counterproductive, and offers a potential remedy. Three experiments simulated a WhatsApp conversation about COVID-19 vaccine disinformation, examining corrections in the high-uncertainty context of the early 2021 stage of the pandemic (Studies 1 and 2) and among vaccine skeptics in 2024 (Study 3). A science-based correction backfired during the pandemic and was ineffective among skeptics in 2024. However, a brief, content-agnostic intervention, comprising three simple prompts directing attention to facts and experts, consistently attenuated these patterns. The intervention specifically enhanced the effectiveness of science-based corrections, but not corrections without a source, and it worked even for skeptics who typically distrust science, suggesting it acts by increasing the salience of evidence and expertise. These findings indicate that for science to be an effective antidote to disinformation, individuals may first need a cognitive nudge toward an evidence-oriented mindset.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Scientific Reports
Published
2026-06-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-54720-9
Primary Topic
Misinformation and Its Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

When scientific sources fail to convince: evidence-oriented thinking enhances the effectiveness of science-based corrections

Ullrich K. H. Ecker, Ruth Mayo, Anat Lande-Brenner
Scientific Reports
Misinformation and Its Impacts
article

When scientific sources fail to convince: evidence-oriented thinking enhances the effectiveness of science-based corrections

Ullrich K. H. Ecker, Ruth Mayo, Anat Lande-Brenner
article en

Abstract

This research demonstrates that citing scientific sources to correct disinformation can be ineffective or even counterproductive, and offers a potential remedy. Three experiments simulated a WhatsApp conversation about COVID-19 vaccine disinformation, examining corrections in the high-uncertainty context of the early 2021 stage of the pandemic (Studies 1 and 2) and among vaccine skeptics in 2024 (Study 3). A science-based correction backfired during the pandemic and was ineffective among skeptics in 2024. However, a brief, content-agnostic intervention, comprising three simple prompts directing attention to facts and experts, consistently attenuated these patterns. The intervention specifically enhanced the effectiveness of science-based corrections, but not corrections without a source, and it worked even for skeptics who typically distrust science, suggesting it acts by increasing the salience of evidence and expertise. These findings indicate that for science to be an effective antidote to disinformation, individuals may first need a cognitive nudge toward an evidence-oriented mindset.

Scientific Reports
The University of Western Australia (AU), Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
Israel Science Foundation
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Misinformation and Its Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.