{"title":"Active versus passive: evaluating the effectiveness of inoculation techniques in relation to misinformation about climate change","authors":"Madison Green, C. McShane, A. Swinbourne","doi":"10.1080/00049530.2022.2113340","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective The current study evaluated whether an active inoculation (interactive skill development) or a passive inoculation message (provision of information) were effective tools for conferring resistance to misinformation about climate science in the context of extreme weather events. Method Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: a control condition (no training); a passive inoculation condition; or an active inoculation condition. Participants completed demographic questions followed by training or no training and then evaluated a misinformation and factual article for reliability and persuasiveness. Results Participants in the active inoculation condition rated the reliability and persuasiveness of the misinformation article and the reliability of the factual article lower than participants in the control condition. Participants in the passive inoculation training did not rate the reliability and persuasiveness of a misinformation and factual article significantly differently to those in the control condition. When factors such as ideological worldview and climate change beliefs were controlled for however, the inoculation interventions had no significant effect on ratings of reliability and persuasiveness for a misinformation or factual article. Conclusion Inoculation seems to be a promising method of preventing the acceptance of misinformation on climate science. However, this analysis highlights that more investigation is required in order to determine the most effective inoculation training design. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: (1) Misinformation about the occurrence of anthropogenic climate change has led to a lack of support for policies which address climate change. (2) Inoculation theory and its application have been extensively studied and are considered an effective method for conferring resistance to persuasion. (3) There is some conflict within the literature as to whether an active or passive inoculation is the most effective method for conferring resistance. What this topic adds: (1) Further evidence for the effectiveness of inoculation interventions in the recent application to climate science misinformation. (2) Active inoculation was more effective than passive inoculation. (3) Need for further evaluation into the mechanisms which facilitate resistance to persuasion and therefore evoke attitude/behaviour change.","PeriodicalId":8871,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00049530.2022.2113340","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
ABSTRACT Objective The current study evaluated whether an active inoculation (interactive skill development) or a passive inoculation message (provision of information) were effective tools for conferring resistance to misinformation about climate science in the context of extreme weather events. Method Participants were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: a control condition (no training); a passive inoculation condition; or an active inoculation condition. Participants completed demographic questions followed by training or no training and then evaluated a misinformation and factual article for reliability and persuasiveness. Results Participants in the active inoculation condition rated the reliability and persuasiveness of the misinformation article and the reliability of the factual article lower than participants in the control condition. Participants in the passive inoculation training did not rate the reliability and persuasiveness of a misinformation and factual article significantly differently to those in the control condition. When factors such as ideological worldview and climate change beliefs were controlled for however, the inoculation interventions had no significant effect on ratings of reliability and persuasiveness for a misinformation or factual article. Conclusion Inoculation seems to be a promising method of preventing the acceptance of misinformation on climate science. However, this analysis highlights that more investigation is required in order to determine the most effective inoculation training design. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: (1) Misinformation about the occurrence of anthropogenic climate change has led to a lack of support for policies which address climate change. (2) Inoculation theory and its application have been extensively studied and are considered an effective method for conferring resistance to persuasion. (3) There is some conflict within the literature as to whether an active or passive inoculation is the most effective method for conferring resistance. What this topic adds: (1) Further evidence for the effectiveness of inoculation interventions in the recent application to climate science misinformation. (2) Active inoculation was more effective than passive inoculation. (3) Need for further evaluation into the mechanisms which facilitate resistance to persuasion and therefore evoke attitude/behaviour change.
期刊介绍:
Australian Journal of Psychology is the premier scientific journal of the Australian Psychological Society. It covers the entire spectrum of psychological research and receives articles on all topics within the broad scope of the discipline. The journal publishes high quality peer-reviewed articles with reviewers and associate editors providing detailed assistance to authors to reach publication. The journal publishes reports of experimental and survey studies, including reports of qualitative investigations, on pure and applied topics in the field of psychology. Articles on clinical psychology or on the professional concerns of applied psychology should be submitted to our sister journals, Australian Psychologist or Clinical Psychologist. The journal publishes occasional reviews of specific topics, theoretical pieces and commentaries on methodological issues. There are also solicited book reviews and comments Annual special issues devoted to a single topic, and guest edited by a specialist editor, are published. The journal regards itself as international in vision and will accept submissions from psychologists in all countries.