Timing matters when correcting fake news

Nadia M. Brashier, Gordon Pennycook, A. Berinsky, David G. Rand

Summary

Providing fact-checks after headlines improved subsequent truth discernment more than providing the same information during (labeling) or before (prebunking) exposure.

Abstract

Countering misinformation can reduce belief in the moment, but corrective messages quickly fade from memory. We tested whether the longer-term impact of fact-checks depends on when people receive them. In two experiments (total N = 2,683), participants read true and false headlines taken from social media. In the treatment conditions, “true” and “false” tags appeared before, during, or after participants read each headline. Participants in a control condition received no information about veracity. One week later, participants in all conditions rated the same headlines’ accuracy. Providing fact-checks after headlines (debunking) improved subsequent truth discernment more than providing the same information during (labeling) or before (prebunking) exposure. This finding informs the cognitive science of belief revision and has practical implications for social media platform designers.

Journal

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Altmetric Attention Score

Cite This Paper

Brashier, N.M., Pennycook, G., Berinsky, A.J., & Rand, D.G. (2021). Timing matters when correcting fake news. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118.

Bibliography

The following papers were cited within this study.

Title Authors Year Cited by

The following papers were conducted after this paper's publication, and reference this exact study. They can be thought of as 'ensuing from' or 'being derived from' this study.

Title Authors Year Cited by

The following papers are recommended by Semantic Scholar.

Title Authors Year Citations Link