Active versus passive: evaluating the effectiveness of inoculation techniques in relation to misinformation about climate change

IF 3.6 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Madison Green, C. McShane, A. Swinbourne
{"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.
主动与被动:评估接种技术对气候变化错误信息的有效性
摘要目的本研究评估了在极端天气事件背景下,主动接种(互动技能发展)或被动接种信息(提供信息)是否是抵抗气候科学错误信息的有效工具。方法参与者被随机分配到三种条件中的一种:对照条件(无训练);被动接种条件;或活性接种条件。参与者完成了人口统计问题,然后进行了培训或不培训,然后评估了一篇错误信息和事实文章的可靠性和说服力。结果主动接种条件下的参与者对虚假信息文章的可靠性和说服力以及事实文章的可靠性的评分低于对照条件下的参加者。被动接种培训的参与者对错误信息和事实文章的可靠性和说服力的评价与对照组没有显著差异。然而,当意识形态世界观和气候变化信念等因素得到控制时,接种干预措施对错误信息或事实文章的可靠性和说服力评级没有显著影响。结论接种疫苗似乎是一种很有前途的防止气候科学错误信息被接受的方法。然而,这一分析强调,需要进行更多的调查,以确定最有效的接种训练设计。关键点关于这一主题的已知情况:(1)关于人为气候变化发生的错误信息导致对应对气候变化的政策缺乏支持。(2) 接种理论及其应用已被广泛研究,并被认为是赋予说服抵抗力的有效方法。(3) 关于主动接种还是被动接种是产生耐药性的最有效方法,文献中存在一些冲突。本主题补充道:(1)在最近应用于气候科学错误信息的过程中,疫苗接种干预措施有效性的进一步证据。(2) 主动接种比被动接种更有效。(3) 需要进一步评估有助于抵制说服从而引起态度/行为改变的机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian Journal of Psychology
Australian Journal of Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信